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.
Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Chaudhary Popatbhai Revab ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR1217]; (2006)ILLJ1069Guj
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Short facts for disposal of the present appeal in nutshell are that the respondent-Chaudhary Popatbhai Revabhai (workman) was working as driver with the appellant-Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). On 3rd June 1994 when the workman was on duty as driver and plying the vehicle between Vadnagar and Mehsana an accident took place, the respondent was arrested and was ultimately prosecuted. The Department/establishment also initiated departmental proceedings. Before the Criminal Court decided the matter finally the workman was found guilty in the departmental inquiry and was awarded punishment of withholding of one increment. The said order had attained finality. The prosecution launched at the instance of the Police continued and culminated into conviction of said driver. The order was maintained upto High Court. It is not the say of the workman that the order passed by the High Court...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cadila Chemicals P. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(Guj)507; [2005]278ITR633(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. The following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the question regarding computation of capital employed for granting relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was rightly decided by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ?'2. The assessment year is 1982-83 and the relevant accounting period is the calendar year 1981. The assessee, a limited company, claimed relief under Section 80J on the total capital employed of Rs. 1,08,97,124. At the rate of 7.5 per cent, the relief worked out to Rs. 8,17,134. On going through the balance-sheet of the new industrial undertaking of the assessee, namely, Ankleshwar unit, the Assessing Officer found that a sum of Rs. 1,08,95,124 was shown as having been transferred from the head office, which was admittedly the old unit. According to the Assessing Officer, be...
Babul Products Private Ltd. Vs. Zen Products
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-2005
Reported in: (2005)3GLR2309; 2005(31)PTC135(Guj)
ORDERAt this stage Mr. Mihir Joshi, Senior Advocate for the appellant requested that the interim relief may be extended for a period of four weeks. Mr. Mihir Thakore, Senior Advocate for the respondent has objected to this request. However, in the interest of Justice, the interim order as granted by the Supreme Court shall continue upto 8th August 2005....
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Arvind Jewellers
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(Guj)163; [2007]290ITR689(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J. 1. Following two questions have been referred by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act), at the instance of CIT :Question No. 1'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in cancelling the order made by the CIT in exercise of the powers under Section 263 of the IT Act, 1961 ?Question No. 2Whether, when the CIT was satisfied that the registration was granted by the ITO without examining the genuineness of the firm, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the said order ?'2. The assessment year is 1981-82 and the relevant accounting period is Samvat year 2036. The assessee, a partnership firm, sought registration in terms of provisions of Section 185 of the Act. The AO passed an order on 17th Nov., 1983 granting registration to the assessee-firm in the following words :'Assessee-firm according to partnership deed came into existence w.e.f. 31st March, 1980.Form No. 11 along with partnership deed has been filed w...
Manguben Wd/O. Dhiraji S. Parmar and 4 ors. Vs. Bhuptaji R. Parmar and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2187; (2006)1GLR746
A.L. Dave, J.1. This First Appeal arises out of a judgment and award by M.A.C. Tribunal, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar rendered in M.A.C. Petition No. 303 of 1982.2. The appellants had preferred the said claim on account of accidental death of Dhiraji Sonaji and had claimed an amount of Rs. 75,000/-. It was the case of the claimants - appellants that the deceased, while travelling in Trailer No. GRS-9986 attached to Tractor No. GRG-8837, met with an accident in the outskirt of village Berna. 3. The claim petition was opposed to by the insurer of the vehicle respondent No. 2 -New India Insurance Co. Ltd. - contending that the driver of the vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence to drive a tractor.4. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence led by parties, by the impugned judgment and award rendered in M.A.C. Petition No. 303 of 1982 and other cognate matters, passed an award of Rs. 41,000/- in favour of the claimants but, came to a conclusion that only the driver and the owner...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Parmanand M. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Guj)641; [2005]278ITR3(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J. 1. The following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench B' 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 setting aside the order made by the CIT invoking the provisions of section 263 of the I.T. Act wherein he had directed the ITO to consider initiation of penalty proceedings Section 271(1)(a) of the Act ?2. The Assessment Year is 1982-83 and the relevant accounting period is year ended on Aso Vad Amas S.Y. 2039. The assessee filed a return of income on 13th August, 1984 and the assessment came to be completed on 26th November, 1984 under Section 143(3) of the Act.3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (the Commissioner) initiated revisional proceedings under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that scrutiny of the assessment records showed that the Assessing Officer had failed to charge interest under Secti...
Jagrutiben Babubhai Shah President Vs. State of Guajrat thr' Secretary ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: (2005)3GLR2621
Akil Kureshi, J.1. In the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 21.4.2005 for holding a meeting on 3rd May 2005 for putting to vote a no-confidence motion against the petitioner who is the President of the Kutch District Panchayat The petitioner has also challenged the communication dated 20th April, 2005 from the Government to the District Development Officer requesting the District Development Officer to hold a meeting for considering the no-confidence motion on or before 4th May, 2005.2. The petitioner was the President of the District Panchayat, Kutch. The present strength of the District Panchayat is of 29 members. 22 members of the District Panchayat signed a notice of no-confidence motion against the petitioner on 30th March, 2005 and addressed the same to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to convene a meeting of the District Panchayat within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice i.e. by 13th April, 2005. The petitioner is...
Manguben and ors. Vs. Bhuptaji R. Parmar and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: I(2007)ACC196
A.L. Dave, J.1. This first appeal arises out of a judgment and award by M.A.C. Tribunal, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar rendered in M.A.C. Petition No. 303 of 1982.2. The appellants had preferred the said claim on account of accidental death of Dhiraji Sonaji and had claimed an amount of Rs. 75,000. It was the case of claimant-appellants that deceased, while travelling in trailer No. ORS 9986 attached to tractor No. GRG 8837, met with an accident in the outskirt of village Berna.3. The claim petition was opposed to by the insurer of the vehicle New India Assurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 2, contending that the driver of the vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence to drive a tractor.4. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence led by parties, by the impugned judgment and award rendered in M.A.C. Petition No. 303 of 1982 and other cognate matters, passed an award of Rs. 41,000 in favour of the claimants, but came to a conclusion that only the driver and the owner of the vehicle i...
Mohanbhai Ramjibhai Keratra Vs. Surendranagar District Panchayat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR792]; (2005)2GLR1789
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The factual matrix for disposal of the present appeal is that the appellant, Mohan Ramjibhai, was appointed on 21st May, 1983, and was stopped from work with effect from 21st June, 1986; he made a Reference to the Labour Court that his removal was violative of Section-25(G) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court decided against the interest of the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner came to this Court in Special Civil Application No. 6436 of 1996, which was dismissed on 30th July, 1997. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the present appellant preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 1419 of 1997. The Division Bench of this Court, in its judgement, observed that there were no violations of the provisions of Section-25(F) of the Act, however, the Division Bench found that the question of Section--25(G) and its applicability required reconsideration. The matter was remitted to the Labour Court for a fresh decision. The...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gujarat State Export Corpn. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Guj)251; [2005]279ITR477(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act), at the instance of the CIT :'Whether the Tribunal has not erred in law and on facts in holding that the order of rectification made by the ITO in respect of following items : Rs.(1) Commission on sales to overseas distributors 8,25,922(2) Stationery and printing (50 per cent of Rs. 1,60,743) 80,372(3) E.C.G.C. promotion expenses 18,054(4) Expenses for participation in International Trade Fair 1,74,053(5) Salary (50 per cent of Rs. 1,99,350) 5,46,679(6) Rent (50 per cent of Rs. 2,33,537) 1,16,76916,61,849is not sustainable in view of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of T.S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Bros. and Ors. : [1971]82ITR50(SC) ?'2. The assessment year is 1979-80 and the relevant accounting period is the financial year ended on 31st March, 1979. The assessee, a limited company, in its return of income claimed w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »