Gujarat Court July 2008 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.
Ravjibhai Gigabhai Vs. Virjibhai Ravjibhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Guj171; (2009)1GLR407
ORDERM.R. Shah, J.1. The petitioner-original defendant-respondent tenant is before this Court by way of present Civil Revision Application being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Rajkot in Regular Civil Appeal No. 30 of 1981, whereby the appeal preferred by the respondents herein-original plaintiffs has been allowed by quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. The learned appellate Judge has been pleased to ordered that the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the tenant') shall hand over the vacant possession of the premises to the respondents herein-original plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as 'the landlord'). It is also further ordered by the learned appellate Court that the tenant shall also pay the amount of mesne profit at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month.2. Petitioner is the original defendant-tenant. Respondents herein are the original plaintiffs-landlords. The premises in question was lease...
Ashwinkumar Nee Pankajbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR79
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition has been preferred challenging order dated 30-9-1999 passed by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (G.R.T.) whereunder orders made by Deputy Collector on 27-8-1996 and A.L.T. on 15-12-1995 have been confirmed.2. The petitioner challenges the legality and validity by raising a question as to whether the G.R.T. has rightly exercised revisional jurisdiction as provided under Section 38 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 (the Act). On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that the petitioner is an agriculturist owning agricultural lands of various survey numbers situated at Village Moksi, Taluka Savli, District Vadodara.3. According to the petitioner, the lands were held by members of Hindu Undivided Family (H.U.F.) of the petitioner. That the petitioner had accordingly filled up the necessary prescribed form. Initially the A.L.T., Vadodara by order dated 8-9-1996 in Ceiling Case No. 131 of 1978 declared 43 Acres and 24 Gunthas of land as excess agr...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sarabhai Private Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Reported in: [2009]176TAXMAN6(Guj)
Jayant Patel, J.1. The question referred to this Court reads as under:Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to take the ALV on the basis of rent received by the assessee or the basis of rental agreement and not on the basis of gross rental value determined by Small Causes Court?2. To examine the aforesaid question, some facts may have relevance which can be summarised as under:3. The Assessee is a Private Ltd. Company. It is having various properties situated at different places and one of the property which is concerned with the present Reference is known as Shantisadan located at Ahmedabad. As per the Assessee, on the basis of the rental agreement, it had received rental income of Rs. 27,467/- from the property of Shantisadan and the said income was shown in the return by the Assessee. However, in the assessment proceedings, the Assessment Officer based on the gross rental value of the property assessed by Small Causes Court, ...
Somabhai Babubhai Parmar Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR253]; (2009)1GLR438
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.2. The main Special Civil Application No. 12302 of 2004 is filed by petitioner, where, petitioner Corporation has challenged the order passed by Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara in Approval Application (IT) No. 89 of 1997 in Demand Reference (IT) No. 187 of 1994 dated 3rd December 2003. The Approval Application is rejected by Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara.3. This Court, by order dated 24th September 2004, issued 'rule' returnable on 24th November 2004. In the meanwhile, ad-interim relief in terms of Para 15(C) granted by this Court, where, implementation of order passed by Industrial Tribunal in Approval Application No. 89 of 1997 is stayed. Against the main petition, affidavit-in-reply is filed by respondent supporting the decision given by Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara.4. The Civil Application No. 8323 of 2004 is filed in registry on 7th December 2004 with a prayer to grant 17B wages to the responden...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Reported in: 2008(120)ECC231; 2008(156)LC231(Gujarat); 2008(232)ELT600(Guj)
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. By this appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, Commissioner of Customs, Kandla is before this Court being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 26.12.2006 rendered in Appeal No. C/978/2006 by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad bearing No. A/42/WZB/A'bad/07, whereby the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla dated 16.05.2006 being Order in Original No. KDL/COMMR/21/2006 and issued following directions:7. Taking into account the ratio of various judgments quoted by the learned Advocate for the appellant, the order of the Commissioner is set aside with the following directions:a. The bills of entry filed by M/s Magpie Overseas Co. should be treated as cancelled.b. The present appellant shall be permitted to file fresh bill of entry/bills of entry in respect of the entire quantity of 500Mts.c. The appellant shall file fresh bill of entry without claiming exemption under Notificatio...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. RubamIn (P) Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Guj)162; [2009]312ITR18(Guj)
Akil Kureshi, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, following questions have been referred to this Court:1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the CIT(A)'s order deleting the addition of Rs. 61,602 being the difference in the amount of depreciation as a result of changing the method of providing the depreciation from straight line method to WDV method?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the CIT(A)'s order deleting the disallowance of Rs. 9,58,068 representing the assessee's claim for depreciation as prior period adjustments as a result of the assessee's switch over from straight line method to WDV method for providing depreciation?2. The assessee is a company in which public are not substantially interested. While framing the assessment for the asst. yr. 1989-90, the AO made addition of two amounts of Rs. 61,602 and Rs. 9,58,068 by disallowing deprecia...
S.J. Sanghvi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Guj)138
D.A. Mehta. J.1. This petition challenges order dt. 29th Dec., 1995 passed under Section 264 of the IT Act, 1961 (the' Act') by respondent No. 1 in relation to asst. yr. 1993-94.2. The relevant facts which are material for the purposes of appreciating the present controversy read as under, as stated in para No. 2 of the petition:The assessment year herein concerned is 1993-94. During this year, the petitioner rendered service as a Professor in Socialist Peoples' Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Al-Arab Medical University and earned salary income equivalent to Rs. 5,66,392 on which tax equivalent to Rs. 1,63,802 was deducted at source by the said employer. The petitioner submitted a return under Section 139, showing the said income and also stating that Rs. 1,63,802 was the TDS therefrom in Libya. Under Section 80R, 50 per cent of the above income is available by way of deduction and accordingly the petitioner did claim in the statement of income (copy at Exh. 'A') the deduction of Rs. 2,83,196. ...
Gujarat State Road Transport Corp. and anr. Vs. Hemantsinh B. Jadeja
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR1009]; (2008)3GLR2023
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and other appellants-original defendants have approached this Court by way of this Second Appeal challenging the operative part of the decree passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 30 of 2002 by the District Judge, Rajkot dated 21.9.2006 only to the extent that it contains direction to the appellants to maintain status-quo regarding service of the original plaintiff till he exhausts the alternative remedy, on the ground that said direction could not have been passed when the Court had upheld the contention that dispute of such nature was beyond the purview of Civil Court and party was relegated to the remedy.3. On 28.02.2008, this Court (Coram: R.H. Shukla, J.) issued notice to the respondent, which was made returnable on 18.03.2008 with a clear understanding that notice was being issued for hearing and finally disposing of the appeal. Both the counsels have agreed that the Second Ap...
Shreeji Shroff Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-ii
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: 218(2008)CCR296
H.B. Antani, J.1. By filing the present petition, the petitioner challenges the orders dated 22.07.99 and 03.11.99 passed by the respondent, annexures 'B' and 'E' respectively.2. The petitioner is a partnership firm. For A.Y. 1994-95, certain additions were made to the returned income of the petitioner, which is the subject matter of an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad. The said appeal is pending. It is submitted that in the meanwhile, Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 [KVSS] was formulated and under the KVSS, every assessee desirous of taking advantage of KVSS was required to make a declaration in respect of tax arrears and a determination of the amount payable under KVSS and on payment of such determined tax, the disputes between the department and the assessee were regarded as settled. The petitioner filed a declaration under KVSS on 31.12.98. In pursuance thereof, the respondent, vide order dated 27.01.99, which was served on the petitioner on 04.02.99, det...
Rajoo Engineers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Guj)53
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition was originally filed challenging notices issued by the respondent under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for asst. yrs. 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. At the time of admission on 23rd Nov., 1999, the Court recorded that 'Mr. Soparkar does not press this Spl. Civil Appln. insofar as it relates to asst. yrs. 1994-95 and 1995-96'.2. Learned senior advocate for the petitioner states that return of income for asst. yr. 1993-94 was filed declaring income of Rs. 16,32,594. On 10th Jan., 1996, assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act came to be made assessing total income of Rs. 16,55,090. The respondent issued notice under Section 148 of the Act on 16th Jan., 1997. It was contended that considering the reasons recorded for asst. yr. 1993-94, which appear as annexure to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent, it was apparent that reasons had not been recorded on the day the impugned notice was issued because the reasons are dated 15th J...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »