Gujarat Court July 2005 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.
Cit Vs. Valimkbhai H. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-21-2005
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(Guj)113; [2006]280ITR487(Guj)
D. A. Mehta J.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred the following question under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ('the Act'), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax.'Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the penalty levied under section 271 (1) (c) on the ground that there cannot be any question of concealment of income when there is no income ?'The assessment year is 1983-84. The assessee filed a return of income declaring total loss of Rs. 3,37,414. The assessee was assessed on a total income of Rs. 2,94,480. In the return of loss the assessee, who is a manufacturer of common salt, claimed loss of 6,200 tonnes of salt washed away on account of cyclone (5100 tonnes) and rain wash (1100 tonnes) valuing the loss of Rs. 50 per tonne. In support of the claim a certificate from the Deputy Commissioner of Salt to the effect that a loss of Rs. 2,40,000 had been suffered was produced. The assessing officer...
Hardly Oil and Gas Limited Vs. Hindustran Oil Exploration Company Limi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: (2006)1GLR658
ORDERA.L. Dave, J.1. Present First Appeal under Section 37(1)(a) of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) arises out of an order rendered in Arbitration Petition No. 120 of 2005 on 16th May,2005 by learned Joint District Judge, Vadodara. The order was passed in respect of an Application preferred by Hardy Oil and Gas Ltd. - present appellant (formerly known as Jehan Energy Ltd.) under Section 9 of the Act, praying for interim relief in following terms :39. The petitioner, therefore, prays that pending the arbitration proceedings between the petitioner and the respondents :(a) The Respondents, their agents, servants be restrained from acting in breach of Agreement dated 14-10-1998 and Deed of Adherence dated 30-08-2991. They be further restrained from transacting any business that may require unanimous consent of the Board as stipulated in Code of Best Practice. The Respondents be further restrained from taking and/or implementing any steps that may...
Dr. Kailashben Ninama Junior Lecturer Vs. Gujarat University and 3 ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Guj328
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Dr. Kailashben Ninama, petitioner, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and appropriate order or direction in the nature of mandamus holding and declaring that the petitioner is eligible for getting admission in Post Graduate Course (P.G. Course for short) in the subject of Preventive and Social Medicine (hereinafter referred to as SP&SM;) for the vacant seat of general category being a candidate of Scheduled Tribe category. He has further prayed that the Selection Committee has wrongly refused admission to the petitioner though the petitioner has secured more than 40% marks which is required for S.T. Candidates. It is further prayed that the Selection made by the Selection Committee not to select the petitioner be declared as illegal and void and this Court may be pleased to direct the Selection Committee - respondent No. 2, to give admission to the petitioner on...
Manager, Gati Cargo Management Services Vs. Pandey Narendrakumar Rajit ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR360]
M.R. Shah, J.1. In this petition tinder Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the order passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad, dated 20th January, 2003 below Exh. 7 in Recovery Application No. 1499 of 2001 and also prayed for a declaration that the Recovery application filed by the motor transport worker under Section 33-C(2) of The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the I.D. Act' for short) is not maintainable.The petitioner is a Motor Transport Undertaking and governed by Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961, The respondent-workman filed a Recovery Application No. 1499 of 2001 before the Labour Court, Ahmedabad under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act claiming Rs. 53,015.16 ps., towards unpaid salary, house rent allowance, medical allowance, tea allowance and bonus. Considering the provisions of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 ['MTW Act' for short] being a special enactment for benefits of motor transport workers more par...
Gujarat Sheep and Wool Development Corporation Ltd. and anr. Vs. Govin ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR391]
K.S. Jhaveri, J.1. This petition is directed against the judgment and award dated 30th April, 1999 passed by the Labour Court, Amreli in Reference (L.C.J.) No 78/99, whereby the Labour Court has directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service on his original post with 70% back wages.The short facts of the case are that the respondent was working on a daily wage basis for a particular scheme. Since the scheme under which the respondent was working was over, his services came to an end w.e.f. 1st July, 1988. Being aggrieved by the said action, the respondent raised an industrial dispute which was ultimately referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. The Labour Court after appreciating the materials produced before it passed the impugned award Pursuant to that the petitioner under Section 26-A of the Industrial Disputes Rules, 1966 preferred an application being Misc. Application No. 3/99, which came to be rejected vide order dated 2nd May, 2000. Hence, this petition.2....
Birla Vxl Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: [2006]66SCL69(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The applicant, namely, Birla VXL Limited has taken out this Judge's Summons praying for direction for convening the meeting of Unsecured Creditors of OCM Division of the applicant Company, being transferred to OCM (India) Limited for the purpose of considering and if thought fit, approving with or without modification, the Scheme of Arrangement between the applicant Company and its Existing Lenders, Creditors and Shareholders and OCM India Limited and its Shareholders. The applicant has also prayed for the extension of the period for filing Company Petition in terms of Rule 79 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 for a period of 7 days from the date of filing Chairman's report of the meeting of the Unsecured Creditors of OCM Division of the applicant Company in terms of prayer (a) of the Judge's Summons.2. An affidavit is filed by Shri Girish Bhatia, Company Secretary of the applicant Company. Mr. Mihir Thakore & Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned Senior advocates appearing with...
Official Liquidator of Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calicoprinting Mills Co. Ltd ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: [2008]144CompCas807(Guj); [2005]63SCL304(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The Official Liquidator has filed this report on 4-5-2005 seeking, inter alia, confirmation of sale of 2,30,327 Sq. Meters of free hold land or thereabout, bearing City Survey Nos. 382, 382/1 to 382/66 and all other assets of the Company situated at Anik Road, Chembur, Mumbai in favour of M/s. Rockline Construction Company of RNA House, Level III, 50 Veer Nariman Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400 023, for a consideration of Rs. 120.50 crores on the terms and conditions of the Tender Form produced at Annexure K to the report and/or on such further terms and conditions as this Court may deem just and proper or otherwise.2. The Official Liquidator has also prayed for other directions with regard to ratification of action taken by the Sale Committee in not holding auction for residential plot situated at Diamond Garden, Chembur, Mumbai and ratification of the action taken by the Sale Committee in making ad hoc payment of Rs. 4,68,778 to M/s. MITCON Consultancy Services Ltd., against ...
Baldev P. Ganeriwal and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4737
Jayant Patel, J.1. The petitioners have preferred these petitions for quashing of complaints filed by the respondent No. 2 which have been registered as M. Case No. 1 of 2003 before the Ld. Magistrate below which the Ld. Magistrate has passed the order for investigation under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C by police.2. Heard Mr. Nanavaty for the petitioners in both the petitions and Mr. Gohil for the repondent No. 1-State and Mr. Lakhani for the original complainant.3. The law on the aspect of quashing of the complaint is settled in as much as if the accusation made in the complaint shows that the case is made out for commission of offence, in normal circumstances, the court would not exercise its power for quashing the complaint. A perusal of the complaint shows that as per the complainant the goods were entrusted to the company, namely, Diamond Shipping Co. Ltd. of which the petitioners are Directors and other office bearers and the capacity of the said company was as carrier. As stated in...
Casil Health Products Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: [2005]62SCL393(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. These are the petitions filed by three petitioner Companies for sanction of a Scheme of arrangement consisting of Slump Sale of two of the divisions of Casil Health Products Limited (CHPL) to Biosulin International Private Limited (SBIPL) and amalgamation of residual Casil Health Products Limited with Genvista Pharmaceuticals Private Limited (SGPPL), the Transferee Company under Section 391 read with Section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.2. All the petitioner Companies belong to the same group of management. CHPL, the Transferor Company is a listed public limited Company. One of the petitioner Companies viz. Biosulin International Private Limited (BIPL) is a wholly owned subsidiary of CHPL. The other Company viz. GPPL is engaged in the manufacturing of pharmaceutical products. CHPL is engaged in both manufacturing and trading of various items required for medical profession other than drugs and pharmaceuticals. The arrangement is proposed with a view to segregate the ma...
Gopalbhai Chaturbhai AmIn Vs. District Magistrate and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4751
Sharad D. Dave, J. 1. By filing this petition, the petitioner detenu has challenged the detention order dated 28.12.2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Gandhinagar in exercise of the powers conferred upon her under Sub-section(1) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 ('the Act' for short), as, the Sdangerous person and Sproperty grabber and is required to be detained under the preventive detention, so that, he may not continue with such type of illegal activities.2. Along with the detention order, the detenu was also served with the grounds of detention of the same date. In the said grounds, there is a reference to four criminal cases which are filed under the Indian Penal Code. In the grounds of detention, the statements of certain witnesses have been recorded.3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner detenu has raised manifold contentions. It is mainly submitted that when the detention order dated 28.12.2004 came to be passed, the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »