Gujarat Court May 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.
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Abdulsaeed Abdulhamid Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-2004
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Guj)276; [2006]28ITR132(Guj)
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. In these two references at the instance of the revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act' for short), has referred the following common questions of law for our opinion for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83:'(1) Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in allowing 1/6th as repairs irrespective of the fact that the assessee has incurred any expenditure on repairs, though the same is not allowable deduction in Wealth-tax Act for valuation purposes?'(2) Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in allowing collection charges at Rs.10,578/- as against the Wealth-tax Officer allowing this expenditure to the extent of Rs.3,600/-?'2. Since common questions of law and facts are involved and the controversy raised in both these references is arising out of claim made by the respondents - assessees who are co-owners of the same property each having 1/3rd share in the prop...
Avlesh Oil Mills Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj346
D.N. Patel, J.1. The petitioner challenging under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the action of the respondent of issuing a bill for minimum charges of electricity connection. The respondent has issued as per the agreement between the petitioner and respondent, a bill for minimum charges as per clause-2 of the undertaking given by the petitioner. The said clause reads as under:'(2) In consideration of the special obligations assumed and or investments made by the Board for making supply available, I/We hereby guarantee that the total annual charges payable by me/us for the electrical energy consumed shall not be less than Rs. 1,12,038/- subject to monthly minimum charges payable under the tariff in force, the difference between the guaranteed minimum annual charges and the actual monthly charges paid by me/us (if the latter are less than the former) shall be payable at the end of each 12 months period.'2. The respondent has issued a bill for minimum charges at Rs. 54...
Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Vs. Amar Trading Comp ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj362; (2004)2GLR1744
K.A. Puj, J.1. This Appeal from Order is filed by the present appellant - original defendant against the order dated 01.10.03 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Gandhinagar below application Ex. 21 in Regular Civil Suit No. 129 of 2003, whereby the learned trial Judge has allowed the said application Ex. 21 and has directed that on depositing of Rs. 2.00 lakhs as security by the respondent - original plaintiff, the appellant Corporation should refund the amount of security deposit of Rs. 15,50,000 fothwith.2. The brief facts giving rise to this present Appeal from order are as under :-2.1. The appellant is being a Government Company engaged in the work of public distribution system, invited tenders for purchase of 1025 Metric Tonnes ('M.T.' for short) of Bengal gram (whole) to fulfill the requirement of Bengal gram under the Integrated Child Development Scheme. The tenders were invited pursuant to the tender notice dated 18.03.03 and the tender document contained terms and condi...
Habibkhan Usmankhan Pathan Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: (2005)1GLR398
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard the learned advocate Mr. A.Y. Pathan on behalf of petitioner. Learned APP Mr. Kodekar appearing on behalf of respondent and learned advocate Mr. Anant Dave appearing on behalf of Narcotics Control Bureau. Against the present petitioner offence registered under Section 8-C, 20-B and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985. Charge sheet filed against the present petitioner on 20/11/2002. After filing the charge sheet on 20/11/2002 the first application for bail filed by the petitioner on 22/3/2004 in NDPS Case No. 1/2003 by Criminal Misc. Application NO. 53/04. The said application rejected by Special Judge, Navsari on 1/4/2004 against which present application is filed by petitioner.2. Learned advocate Mr. Pathan raised contention before this Court that nothing recovered from the present petitioner. Only statement of accused no. 1 Mohd. Ramzan Kalyari @ Ramzanbhaibhai involved the present petitioner and on that basis the complaint is filed against the petitioner. He submitted that ...
Harenbhai R. Parekh Vs. Satishbhai Asandas Krishnani Administrator of ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj342
R.M. Doshit, J.1. Heard the learned advocates and the respondent No.3 Shri Yashvantbhai Patel.2. This petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India arises from the order dated 17th September, 2003 made by the learned City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad below applications Exhibits 44 and 45 in Civil Suit No.2871/2002. This petition came up for hearing before me on 24th March, 2004. On the said date the order came to be made as under :'Heard the Learned advocates and the respondent no. 3 Shri Yasvantbhai Patel.3. The petitioner, before this Court is the plaintiff in Civil Suit No. 2871/2002 pending before the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 17th September, 2003 made below application Ex.45, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. The subject matter of the suit is a cellar of the building known as 'Vinay Market', situated in Maninagar, Ahmedabad.4. The aforesaid application ex.45 was moved by the respondent no.3 herein, one of the o...
Gas Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Essar Steel Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: (2004)2GLR1642
C.K. Buch, J.1. Applicants are Original Respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 5 of Special Civil Application No. 3348 of 2001. Contesting opponents, namely, Opponent Nos. 1 & 2 are Original Petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 of the said petition. Opponent Nos. 3 & 4, Original Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 of the said petitioner are joined as party respondents in the Civil Application moved for vacating ad interim relief, as, they are parties in the main petition and, being proper parties, in light of the nature of relief prayed.2. The said Civil Application No. 3348 of 2001 (hereinafter referred to as main petition) has been preferred in connection with the matter relating to an erstwhile contract agreement, which was, at relevant point of time, executed and operated between applicant No. 1 Gas Authority of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as GAIL) and Opponent No. 1 M/s. Essar Steel Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ESL) for sale supply of gas and, as per the agreed contractual terms and conditions of the agreed consi...
Suraiya Mohammed Ikbal GulamhussaIn Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1033
C.K. Buch, J.1. The petitioners-revisioners, by moving this Revision Application, have prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment order dated 13th October, 1995, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kutch at Bhuj in Criminal Case No. 1357/1984 and the judgment and order dated 9th June, 2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kutch at Bhuj in Criminal Appeal No. 39/1995, confirming the order of conviction passed by the learned trial Court holding the petitioners guilty of the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The petitioners are the orig. accused persons of the aforesaid Criminal Case, who have been tried on the strength of the complaint filed in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, wherein it is alleged that the petitioners tried to export 550 sheep and goats out of which 182 goats were belonging to prohibited category i.e. Barbara breed. The export of goats of Barbara breed was proh...
Shashibala Sharma, Trustee and Principal Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2004
Reported in: (2004)2GLR1393
C.K. Buch, J.1. Rule. Mr. A.D. Oza, learned Public Prosecutor, waives formal service of Rule. The Revision Application is taken up for final disposal in view of the order dated 30th April, 2004 passed by This Court.2. The petitioner-accused has challenged the order dated 29th April, 2004 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, whereby the learned Magistrate was pleased to grant police remand of the accused persons to the Investigating Agency till 6th May, 2004. It is contended that the said order is illegal and it suffers from vice of non-application of mind, and it is also contrary to the settled principle of law. The petitioner-accused is a lady and even as per the allegations made in the complaint, most of the evidence is required to be collected and recorded either in the nature of documents or from the witnesses concerned to the administration of the school managed by the petitioner-accused. There is no need of custodial interrogation of the petitioner. The...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›