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.
Harshadbhai Bharatbhai Ramavat Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR2345
J.R. Vora, J.1. Above Criminal Appeal is preferred by original accused No. 1 of Sessions Case No. 36 of 2005 of the Court of Fast Track at Porbandar, against the judgment and order delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Porbandar, on 15th of November, 2006, whereby the present appellant being accused No. 1 came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000/- as well as he was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-.2. Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2008 filed by original accused No. 1 came to be admitted by this Court vide Order dated 11th of July, 2008.3. The present applicant - appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2008 has also preferred present Criminal Misc. Application No. 692 of 2008 under...
income Tax Officer Vs. Vxl India Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Guj)242; [2009]312ITR187(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The revenue has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 proposing to formulate the following substantial question of law for determination and consideration of this Court:Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue of grant of deduction under Section 80HHC when the said claim was neither made nor certificates of the auditor was filed under Section 10CCAB of the Act along with return of income.2. This Court has admitted this Tax appeal on 30-8-2000 reframing the following substantial question of law:Whether, the Appellate Tribunal was right in making a remand of the case to the Assessing Authority for considering the claim of deduction under Section 80HHC regardless of the fact that in accordance with Sub-section (4) of the said Section, the assessee had not submitted the requisite report with the certification of the Accountant and the said report with the c...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hynoup Food and Oil Industries Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: [2010]320ITR365(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The Revenue has filed these five tax appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1989-90 to 1992-93 and 1994-95 proposing to formulate the following substantial questions of law.(A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue without adjudicating the same on the merits on the ground that since in the appeal, the effect was below Rs. 1 lakh, the Revenue could not have preferred the same in view of the instructions of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, thereby entitling the hon'ble Tribunal not to decide the same on the merits?(B) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directing the Assessing Officer to grant interest on interest withheld for the period claimed by the assessee?2. This court has admitted all the five appeals on August 6, 2007 and formulated the same questions of law.3...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Concord Pharmaceuticals
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-2008
Reported in: (2008)220CTR(Guj)117; [2009]317ITR395(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The Revenue has filed tax appeals Nos. 1402 to 1405 of 2007 under Section 260A of the IT Act 1961 for asst. yrs. 1995-96 and 1996-97 proposing to formulate the following substantial question of law for determination and consideration of this Court. The same question is formulated in all the four tax appeals.Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue without adjudicating the same on merits on the ground that since in the appeals, tax effect was below Rs. 2 lakhs, the Revenue could not have preferred the same in view of the instructions of the CBDT, thereby entitling the Tribunal not to decide the same on merits?2. Along with these four appeals, several other appeals involving identical question of law were heard by this Court and learned Counsel appearing for the parties have made their submissions in great detail. On behalf of the Revenue, Mr. Manish R. Bhatt, Mr. B.B. Naik, Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, Mr. Pranav Desai and Mr. ...
Cit Vs. Chandulal Alias Vallabhdas Damji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-2008
Reported in: [2009]317ITR426(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The revenue has filed this tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 1997-98 proposing to formulate the following substantial questions of law for the consideration and determination of this Court:A. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal filed by the revenue on the ground of low tax effect ?B. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the addition of Rs. 1,38,422 made on account of short-term capital gains by resorting to rectification of the order under Section 154 of the Act was invalid ?2. This Court has admitted the tax appeal on 24-7-2007 in terms of the above referred substantial questions of law.3. This appeal was heard by us along with other cognate matters. Submissions were made by both the sides. So far as question (A) is concerned, we have passed a detailed order in Tax Appeal Nos. 1402 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›