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.
Central Bureau of Investigation thro' Supdt. of (sic) Vs. State of Guj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3105; (2005)1GLR149
D.H. Waghela, J.1. This application for condoning delay of 244 days in preferring the criminal revision application was contested for respondents Nos.2 to 4, who are the accused persons in Special Case No.25 of 1993 in which charge sheet of the case was ordered to be returned for production before the competent Court by the order which is sought to be challenged in the main revision application. Such order of returning the charge sheet is stated to have come to be passed after about nine years of pendency of the case and upon death of one of the accused persons charged with the offence under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.2. The factual background of delay is stated to be that the impugned order dated 31.12.2001 was received by the public prosecutor on 18.1.2002 and was placed in the file of the public prosecutor on 22.1.2002. The public prosecutor advised the investigating officer to file new charge sheet and marked the file to the concerned clerk. The clerk conce...
Aop of Sanjaybhai R. Patel and 11 ors. Vs. Assessing Officer - Asstt. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: [2004]267ITR129(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. Since common issue is involved in all these petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners have filed these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the Settlement Commission, respondent No.2 herein, on 20.03.2003 under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 withdrawing the reduction or waiver of interest granted by the Settlement Commission under Section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, while passing the orders under Section 245D(4) of the Act on 31.03.1999.3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petitions are as under :-The petitioners have approached the Settlement Commission for settlement of their cases in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIX-A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The Settlement Commission had passed orders on 31.03.1999 under Section 245D(4) in respect of each of the petitioners, interalia, waiving and/or reducing interest ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Madhav Industrial Corpn.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Guj)575
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following question is referred for our opinion, in respect of the asst. yr. 1986-87 :'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts, in holding that the assessee which is engaged in ship breaking business is entitled for grant of deduction under Sections 80HHA and 80-I considering the same as manufacturing activity?'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Revenue and Mr. R.K. Patel, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee.3. Our attention is drawn to the decision of another Division Bench of this Court in CIT v. Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation : [2003]261ITR113(Guj) taking the view that ship breaking activity was not an activity of manufacture or production of any article or thing for the purposes of availing of the benefit of deductions under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the IT Act, 1961. Since the provisions of Section 80HHA are similar, insofar as the controversy involved in the pres...
Sapjaybhai R. Patel Vs. Assessing Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: [2004]135TAXMAN210(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.Since common issue is involved in all these petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners have filed these petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the Settlement Commission, respondent No. 2 herein, on 20-3-2003 under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 withdrawing the reduction or waiver of interest granted by the Settlement Commission under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, while passing the orders under section 2451)(4) of the Act on 31-3-1999.3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petitions are as underThe petitioner have approached the Settlement Commission for settlement of their cases in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIX-A of (lie Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The Settlement Commission had passed orders on 31-3-1999 under section 245(4) in respect of each of the petitioners, inter alia, waiving and/or reducing interest under ...
Cit Vs. Madhav Industrial Corpn.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: [2004]136TAXMAN416(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following question is referred for our opinion, in respect of the assessment year 1986-87 :'Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee which is engaged in ship breaking business is entitled for grant of deduction under sections 80HHA and 80-I considering the same as manufacturing activity ?'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned Standing counsel for the revenue and Mr. R.K. Patel, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee.3. Our attention is drawn to the decision of another Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Vijay Ship Breaking Corpn. : [2003]261ITR113(Guj) , taking the view that ship breaking activity was not an activity of manufacture or production of any article or thing for the purposes of availing of the benefit of deductions under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since the provisions of section 80HHA are similar, insofar as the controversy i...
Cit Vs. Parwatiben Trust
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN161(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.In this Reference at the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred for our opinion in respect of assessment year 1980-81 :-'(i) Whether in law and on facts, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee trust is entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(xxiii) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957?(ii) Whether in law and on facts, the Appellate Tribunal is right in directing the Wealth Tax Officer to allow deduction of Rs. 7,43,270 being the aggregate market value of the interest of the beneficiaries as also deduction of Rs. 1,50,000 from the bank balance as exempt under section 5(1)(xxiii) of the Wealth Tax Act, -1957 ?'2. The following question proposed by the revenue was not referred by the Tribunal and the revenue has not filed any reference application for the said question :'Whether in law and on facts, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee trust has to be treated as a specific trust and not a discretionary trust a...
Aop of Sanjaybhai R. Patel and 11 ors. Vs. Assessing Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)583
K.A. Puj, J.Since common issue is involved in all these petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners have filed these petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the Settlement Commission, respondent No. 2 herein, on 20-3-2003, under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 withdrawing the reduction or waiver of interest granted by the Settlement Commission under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, while passing the orders under section 245D(4) of the Act on 31-3-1999.3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petitions are as under :The petitioners have approached the Settlement Commission for settlement of their cases in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIX-A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Settlement Commission had passed orders on 31-3-1999 under section 245D(4) in respect of each of the petitioners, inter alia, waiving and/or reducing interest under...
Cit Vs. P.B. Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)212
M.S. Shah, J:In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following question is referred for our opinion in respect of assessment years 1979-80 to 1983-84 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in restoring the matter to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for fresh decision of the appeals when the assessee had not filed any appeal against the additions which have been sustained by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the revenue. Though served, none appears for the respondent- assessee.3. During survey operations under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Income Tax Officer came to know that the assessee carried on business in medicines on wholesale basis and that the assessee also maintained books of accounts but they were not produced before the Inspector during survey. Information was also received that the assessee-firm consisted of four partners ca...
Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. Union of India (UOi) thro' Secretary
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(93)ECC526; 2004(165)ELT499(Guj); (2004)2GLR1306
M.S. Shah, J.1. Rule. Mr DN Patel, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Union of India waives service of Rule for the respondents.2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 14.5.2003/14.6.2003 passed by the Settlement Commission rejecting the four applications filed by the petitioners under Section 127-B of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Customs Act').3. The petitioner-Company is a Public Limited Company engaged in the business of manufacture of polyester yarns. The petitioner-Company was also exporting the goods manufactured by it and against the exports, the petitioners were availing the benefit of the Advance Licence Scheme as contained under the Exim Policy of the Government of India. The petitioners obtained Advance Licence dated 15.9.1998 from the Office of the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Ahmedabad entitling the petitioners to import 2,62,500 Kgs. of chips and other inputs. Th...
BomIn Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Majdoor Panchayat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR5]
ORDERH.K. Rathod, J. 1. These matters were reserved for Judgment as CAVas per order dated 24.12.2003. Today, these matters werenotified for pronouncement of the CAV Judgment at 4.45p.m. and the CAV Judgment was pronounced in the Chamberby this Court in presence of learned advocate Mr. N.K.Pahwa for Ms. S.N. Pahwa for the Gujarat MazdoorPanchayat and learned advocate Mr. H.J. Shah for Mr.J.G. Shah for the Company. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »