Gujarat Court January 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. G.K. Swarup
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-2004
Reported in: [2004]139TAXMAN168(Guj)
In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following question of law has been referred for our opinion--'Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty to make valuation of shares of Private Limited Company in accordance with rule 1D of the Wealth Tax Rules and not in accordance with the general break up method 2. On the date of his death i.e., on 18-2-1979, the deceased had 206 shares of a certain private limited company. The accountable person declared the value of these shares at the rate of Rs. 1,553 per share. The computation was made in accordance with the provisions of rule 1D of the Wealth Tax Rules, 1957. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty did not accept the valuation made by the accountable person. According to him, the valuation should not be made in accordance with the principle laid down in the said Rule. He made addition of Rs. 10,000 to the value of land owned by the company, Rs. 33,000 to ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rohit Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)623
M.S. Shah, J. 1. In this reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following question is referred for our opinion for asst. yr. 1980-81:'Whether reimbursement of medical expenses and group insurance premium are to be excluded in computing disallowance under Section 40(c) of the IT Act, 1961?'2. We have heard Mrs, Mona Bhatt for Mr. Manish R. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Though served, none appears for the respondent-assessee.3. The question consists of two parts--the first part with regard to medical expenses and the second part regarding group insurance premium.Our attention has been invited to the order dt. 4th Dec., 2003, in IT Ref. No. 269 of 1987 in respect of this very assessee wherein this Court considered the question of reimbursement of medical expenses in the following terms:'Whether, in law and on facts, reimbursement of medical expenses is required to be excluded while computing disallowance under Section 40(c) of the IT Act, 1961?'After referring to...
Gsrtc Vs. Vithalbhai Laxmanbhai Sarvaiya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR745]
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1 .The present petition is filed by Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') through its Divisional Controller being aggrieved of the judgement and award dated 19.12.2001 in Reference (LCJ) No.165 of 1999. The learned Judge of the Labour Court, Junagadh was pleased to allow the reference in part and was pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 16.4.1998 and was pleased to order reinstatement within 30 days with 40% back wages, with continuity of service. 2. The case of the petitioner corporation is that on the day of the incident, i.e. 28.1.1998 the respondent, driver was driving Bus No.1735 on Veraval-Rangpur route. He was driving the bus in a very rash, negligent and zigzag manner, and was applying the breaks in an indiscriminate manner. Therefore, near I.D. Chauhan High School in Veraval all the passengers of the bus, stopped the driver and informed the conductor of the bus that the driver is in drunken condit...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mani Enterprises
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)215; [2004]267ITR157(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. 1. In this reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following question is referred to our opinion in respect of asst. yr. 1984-85 :'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that provisions of Section 167A were not applicable in the present case and further directing that the assessee should be taxed at appropriate rate considering it as having determinate shares?'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Though the notice is unserved on the respondent-assessee, we are inclined to proceed with the hearing of this reference in view of the fact that the question referred for our opinion is required to be answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.3. The assessee is an AOP. The assessee was sought to be charged tax at the maximum marginal rate under Section 167A of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). The contention of the assessee was that the shares of the beneficiaries and/or the members were dete...
Himson Textile Engg. Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income T ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: [2004]267ITR612(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following question of law has been referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1982-83:-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that the amount of Rs.1,18,920/- representing income tax liability of the erstwhile firm and paid by the assessee company cannot be allowed as deduction as an expenditure while computing the taxable income in the hands of the assessee?'2. We have heard Mr RK Patel, learned counsel for the assessee and Mr MR Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue.3. The assessee claimed deduction of a sum of Rs.1,18,920/- in respect of income tax liability of the erstwhile partnership firm styled as M/s.Himson Textile Engineering Industries. The assessee company joined as a partner in the aforesaid partnership firm which was dissolved on 31st December, 1979. A deed of dissolution was executed between the partners of...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Synbiotics Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)472; [2004]266ITR674(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. 1. In this reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred for our opinion for the asst. yr. 1974-75 :'Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the interest charged under Section 216 of the IT Act amounting to Rs. 11,940?'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue, and Mr. R.K. Patel, learned counsel for the respondent-assesses.3. The IAC(Asst.) while passing order under Section 216 of the IT Act observed that the assessee had wilfully estimated its income at Rs. 15 lakhs on 15th Sept., 1973 and Rs. 14.33 lakhs on 14th Dec., 1973 and thereby deferred the payment to the Government exchequer. After calculations, he observed that the assessee had deferred the payment of Rs. 1.66 lakhs for the first instalment and Rs 66,000 for the second instalment. He, therefore, levied interest under Section 216 amounting to Rs. 11,940.The CIT(A) not only relied on the decision of the Tribunal in...
Himson Textile Engineering Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)88
M.S. Shah, J.In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following question of law has been referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1982-83 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 1,18,920 representing income-tax liability of the erstwhile firm and paid by the assessee-company cannot be allowed as deduction as an expenditure while computing the taxable income in the hands of the assessee?'2. We have heard Mr. R.K. Patel, learned counsel for the assessee, and Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the revenue.3. The assessee claimed deduction of a sum of Rs. 1,18,920 in respect of income-tax liability of the erstwhile partnership firm styled as Himson Textile Engineering Industries. The assessee-company joined as a partner in the aforesaid partnership firm which was dissolved on 31-12-1979. A deed of dissolution was executed between the partners of the said ...
Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. KamruddIn M. Ravji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)338; [2004]267ITR553(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law is referred for our opinion in respect of asst. yr. 1977-78 :'Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and the facts in holding that there was no taxable gift and thereby deleting the taxable gift of Rs. 61,954?'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Though served, none appears for the respondent-assessee.3. The assessee made a gift of Rs. 5,000 in cash on 25th March, 1976 to Khurshid Trust. In the gift-tax return, the assessee disclosed the above gift and claimed exemption of Rs. 5,000 and, therefore, filed nil return. However, the assessee also filed a note alongwith the return disclosing that he had made a gift of half share on 50 per cent profit-sharing in M/s M. Ravji & Co. However, the gift of share in the partnership referred to above was not liable to gift-tax proceedings. The GTO in the course of assessment called upon the assessee to produce evidenc...
Raiben Shiviben Vs. Rameshchandra Bhaiyaji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR771]; (2004)2GLR1225
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned advocate Mr.K.G.Pandit on behalf of petitioner, learned advocate Mr.D.J.Bhatt appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3 & 4. Respondent Nos.1 & 2 are deleted by the petitioner in the present petition. Petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the Labour Court and Industrial Court, Ahmedabad. The Labour Court, Ahmedabad has passed an order vide Exh.18 in complaint No.20 of 1985 dated 21st July 1990, wherein the complaint filed by the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that it is beyond time limit. Against that, Revision Application was filed by the petitioner being numbered 18 of 1990 before the Industrial Court and that Revision Application was filed under Section 85 of the Bombay Industrial Relation Act, 1946 and the said was rejected by the Industrial Court on 26th September 1991.2. Learned advocate Mr.D.J.Bhatt having information has submitted that according to his information, Asarva Mills is closed. Learned advocate Mr.Pandit has submitte...
Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. Ramniklal M. Bambhania
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Guj)539; [2004]269ITR438(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. In these five references, the following common questions of law have been referred for our opinion in respect of asst. yr. 1981-82 :'1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that there was no deemed gift when the assessee relinquished his share in the partnership firm in favour of the new incumbent partner?2. Whether the Tribunal has correctly appreciated the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CGT v. Chhotalal Mohanlal : [1987]166ITR124(SC) '2. The facts giving rise to these references are as under :2.1 All the five assessees were partners in the firm M/s Accurate Engineering Co., having 20 per cent share each. During the previous year relevant to asst. yr. 1981-82, there was a change in the constitution of the firm inasmuch Mr. G.V. Modha, trustee of the Accurate Trust was admitted as a partner with 50 per cent share and, therefore, reducing the share of all the five assessees by 10% each. Subsequently, there was another change ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »