Gujarat Court August 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.
Employees Provident Fund Organization Vs. Jai Corporation Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-21-2008
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR265]; (2009)1GLR123
K.M. Thaker, J.1. In this petition, the Employees Provident Fund Organization (hereinafter referred to as the department) has through the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, challenged an order dated 26.07.2007 passed by the Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as P.F. Tribunal) in Case No. ATA/400(5)/2006, whereby the P.F. Tribunal has allowed the appeal preferred by the present respondent.2. The facts involved in and relevant for the purpose of present petition are that the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner had raised demand against M/s. Santogen Spinning Mills Ltd. (hereinafter referred to 'erstwhile establishment') for Rs. 1,35,96,274/- inclusive of damages under Section 14B and interest under Section 7Q of the Employees Provident Fund And Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the PF Act). It appears that the erstwhile establishment, was declared a sick undertaking under the provisions of Sick Industr...
Jyoti Karmachari Mandal Vs. Rahulbhai Nanubhai AmIn and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ270
ORDER4. Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the observations made in the aforesaid judgment may not be come in their way at the time of final hearing of Special Civil Application No. 17631/2003 and any other pending proceedings before the various Courts like Industrial Court etc.5. Looking to the observations made in the aforesaid Judgment, there are meant for the purpose of disposal of this Contempt Application and same will be considered for this application and not for any other purpose and other applications will be decided on their own merits....
Sunilbhai Fakirbhai Harijan Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2048; (2009)1GLR228
Z.K. Saiyed, J.1. The present appellant - original accused in Sessions Case No. 18 of 1998 was charged and tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 504 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').2. The case of the prosecution is that complainant Shardaben, wife of Ramesh Fakir was residing at Godga Vav Pati, Khan Faliya, Junagadh, with her husband and daughters and was doing labour and cleaning work and her husband was sweeper in Nagar Palika. Her father in law and mother in law and Sunil, the brother of her husband (Diyar), were staying at Gola Vav Pati, Shakkaria Timba, Junaadh.3. On 16.12.1997, husband of Shardaben had gone for service and she, along with her daughters, went to the place of her in-laws at about 6.00 O'clock in the evening and remained there for some time. During that time there were some altercation between her father-in-law, who was in a drunken position, and Sunil about the marriage of Sunil in presence of h...
Bhupendrasinh Ambadan Gadhvi Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ207
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. Hemang Parikh learned AGP waives service of notice of rule.2. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard today.3. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioner was holding licence for 12 Bore Gun vide No. 335/Naroda, as well as licence for Revolver vide No. 347/Naroda. As the Criminal Case was filed against the petitioner, the licence for 12 Bore Gun was suspended vide order dated 17.11.2004, whereas licence for Revolver was cancelled vide order 17.11.2004. As per the petitioner thereafter, the trial is concluded and the petitioner has been acquitted. The petitioner thereafter, moved authority for revocation of the order of suspension of the licence for 12 Bore Gun, which has been revoked. However, so far as the licence for Revolver is concerned, it was stated vide communication dated 7.11.2008, by Joint Police Commissioner to the Additional Chief Secretary that as the licence was cancell...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Sandvik Asia Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: 2009[14]STR11
ORDERD.A. Mehta, J.1. The appellant-revenue has proposed the following two questions:(A) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in allowing the appeal of the respondent by holding that it cannot be appropriate and legal to recover dues of money due to the respondent on the ground that it has a legal entity different from M/s. Chokshi Tubes Company, despite the provisions contained in Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 230(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944?(B) Whether the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case is justified in holding that dues pending against predecessor M/s. Chokshi Tubes Company Ltd. cannot be recovered from its successor i.e. M/s. Sandvik Chokshi Limited?2. Heard the learned advocate for the appellant. It was contended that provisions of Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act) permit deduction of the amount payable to a person from whom certain sums of duty are required to be r...
Patel Tulsiben Ambalal and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR2685
Rajesh H. Shukla, J.1. The present group of matters have been filed to challenge the decision of the respondent No. 2-Director of Primary Education dated 17.7.2008 directing all the District Primary Education Officers of the District Education Committees and the Administrative Officers of the Municipal School Boards to ignore/cancel the certificates of sports issued by respondent No. 7-Gujarat State Women's Football Association, Chandkheda, Dist. Gandhinagar (in Special Civil Application No. 9574 of 2008), Gujarat State Kabaddi Association/Gujarat State Athletic Association/Wrestling Association of Gujarat, Ahmedabad for the purpose of 5% additional marks as weightage to be given on the basis of such certificates of sports in the recruitment to the post of Vidhya Sahayak.2. Since the issues involved in all these petitions are more or less the same and the challenge is to the impugned decision dated 17.7.2008 in all the matters, all these petitions are heard and disposed of together by ...
Arpanaben Krunal Shah Vs. Regional Passport Office
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR237
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. Parghi learned Standing Counsel waives service of notice of rule for the respondent. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard.2. The short fact of the case appears to be that the petitioner had earlier applied for passport, which has been issued vide No. E8180475. In the said passport the birth date recorded is 1.8.1968. The aforesaid is an admitted position. It is a case of the petitioner that earlier application for passport was made based on the birth date recorded in the School Leaving Certificate issued by Maharshi Rang-Avdhoot Vidhyavihar, Higher Secondary, Paldi, Ahmedabad, copy whereof is produced at Annexure B. In the said School Leaving Certificate the birth date of the petitioner is shown as of 1.8.1968. It appears that thereafter, the entry is recorded in the birth and death register, maintained by Navsari, Nagar Palika, as per the provisions of Birth and Death Registration Act 1969 (herei...
The Commissioner of Customs Vs. Senor Metals Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: 2009(236)ELT445(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1.The appellant Revenue has proposed the following questions:[a] Whether pre-shipment inspection certificate issued by an agency not recognized as specified agency at the time of issuance of certificate can be considered to be valid certificate or not in terms of para 2.32 of the Handbook of Procedures (Vol.1) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 on the agency subsequently being recognized as such?[b] Whether violation of Exim Policy 2004-09 would attract confiscation and imposition of penalty in terms of Sections 111(d) and 112 of the Customs Act, 1962?[c] Whether or not, the goods imported in violation of requirements of the provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy can be confiscated in terms of Section 111[d] of the Customs Act, 1962?[d] Whether or not, penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 can be imposed on such importer?2. The adjudicating authority came to the conclusion that the goods imported under Bill of Entry dated 25.5.2005 were not accompanied by ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Official Liquidator of Essab Computer P ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: [2009]308ITR234(Guj); [2009]184TAXMAN45(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law is referred to for the opinion of this court for the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89.Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in upholding the view taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleting the addition made under Section 43B of the Act when the assessee failed to produce any supporting evidence?2. The brief facts of the case are that while framing the assessments, for the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee collected sales tax but the same was not credited into the profit and loss account. The explanation of the assessee was that since the amount has not been credited in the profit and loss account, no deduction has been claimed. Accordingly, Section 43B has no application. Secondly, the amount collected was covered under the scheme from the State Government whereby the sales tax payable would be converted into loan and i...
Sarvariya Exports Ltd. Vs. O.L. of Urmi Oil Limited and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: [2009]147CompCas336(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. Considering the nature of the controversy involved in the appeal, the matter was heard finally on and from 08.08.2008.2. The present appeal challenges order dated 03.04.2008 (Annexure-A) made by the Company Court in Company Application No. 213 of 2008 in Official Liquidator's Report No. 14 of 2008. The appellant herein is original respondent No. 3 in the Company Application while respondent No. 3 herein is the original applicant of Company Application, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein being original respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Hereinafter, for the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their respective description in the Company Application. 3. One M/s. Urmi Oil Industries Limited was ordered to be wound up on 06.09.1994 as per order made in Company Petition No. 29 of 1994. Vide Official Liquidator's Report No. 57 of 2007, directions were sought by the Official Liquidator (O.L.) for putting the properties of the Company in liquidation to sale. Vide ord...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »