Gujarat Court November 2014 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chandrakumar Jethmal Kochar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
K.J. Thaker, J. 1. In compliance to the direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law to this Court: "(1) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition made by the A.O. based on the statements recorded during search proceedings ? (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal's finding to the effect that the other concerns were not benami of the assessee is borne out from the record ?" 2. The facts in brief are that on 08.08.1990 a search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax Authorities on the business premises of the assessee u/s 132 of the I.T. Act. Statement of the assessee was recorded by the authorized Officer u/s 132(4) and during that course the assessee admitted that one Kamal Traders, Naman Traders, Adarsh Textiles and Sampat Traders were benami concerns of the assesssee and these business concerns were being run by the assessee in the name of his employees. Thereafter, the statement of...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-III Vs. Vipassana Trust
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-11-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. This is an appeal by the appellant - revenue, challenging the order of the ITAT, Rajkot (for short, 'the Tribunal), Dated : 29.05.2014, rendered in ITA No. 168/Rjt/2014, whereby, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent - Trust. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Respondent-Trust made an application for recognition under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act', for short), in the prescribed format before the appellant. A report was called by the appellant from its field office and pursuant thereto the application of the Respondent-Trust came to be rejected on the ground that the Respondent-Trust had failed to spent 85 per cent of the amount for the A.Y. 2013-14 relevant to F.Y. 2012-13. Being dissatisfied with the same, the Respondent-Trust preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), which dismissed its appeal. Therefore, the Respondent - Trust carried the matter before the Tribunal, which passed the impugned order. Hence, the presen...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot- III Vs. Pujya Shri Jalarambapa and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-11-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. This is an appeal by the appellant - revenue, challenging the order of the ITAT, Rajkot (for short, 'the Tribunal), Dated : 30.05.2014, rendered in ITA No. 249/Rjt/2014, whereby, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent - Trust. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Respondent - Trust, which came to be created in the year 2002, on 13.09.2013 made an application for recognition under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act', for short), in the prescribed format before the appellant. A report from the field office was called by the appellant and later on the application of the Respondent - Trust came to be rejected on the ground that the Respondent - Trust had failed to spent 85 per cent of the amount for the A.Y.s 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. Being dissatisfied with the same, the Respondent-Trust preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), which dismissed its appeal. Therefore, the Respondent-Trust carried the matter before the Tribunal,...
Tulip Lamkraft Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-10-2014
Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J. - 1. Appellant-assessee has challenged the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal' for short) dated 4 -7 -2014 dismissing the appeal of the assessee. The appellant -company was engaged in the activity of manufacturing laminate sheets. An excise raid was conducted at the manufacturing unit of the assessee on 12/13 -12 -2009. Evidence was collected for the alleged clandestine removal of the goods without payment of Excise Duty. Statement of one Maheshbhai B. Thakkar, Clerk of the company was recorded on 13 -12 -2009. Two statements of Nilesh Kanubhai Thakkar, one of the Directors of the company dated 13 -12 -09 and 17 -2 -2011 were recorded. Eventually, a show cause notice dated 25 -4 -2011 was issued by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise alleging that the appellant had evaded payment of Excise Duty by clearing excisable goods without invoice and without payment of Central Excise Duty to the tune of Rs. 7,57,45...
Vijay Singh Jabbarsingh Gohil Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-10-2014
Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J. 1. Petitioner has challenged an order dated 21 -8 -2014 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) imposing condition of pre -deposit of Rs. 10 lacs to enable the petitioner to pursue his appeal before the Tribunal on merits and to avoid recovery of the penalties imposed by the Commissioner under his Order -in -Original against the petitioner. The issue arises under the Customs Act. A consolidated show cause notice dated 3rd July 2012 was issued against the petitioner and several other persons alleging suppression of FOB value of the exported goods and thereby evading the customs duty. The petitioner was admittedly a transporter of the goods. The allegations against him included those of being part of a syndicate which formed a chain of conspiracy. He not only provided transportation and also arranged for a godown. It was alleged that he used the name of fictitious nonexisting transportation firms to show the...
Pankaj Pratapbhai Thakkar and Others Vs. Deputy Director and Another
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-2014
1. Issue Notice to the respondents returnable on 19th November, 2014. Mr. Soni, the learned APP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondent no.2State of Gujarat. 2. The principal contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is with regard to the legality and validity of the order of issue of warrant passed by the Designated Judge under P.M.L. Act 2002, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur, Ahmedabad dated 29th October, 2012. 3. It appears that a complaint has been lodged against the applicants herein for the offence of money laundering punishable under Section 4 of the Act 2002, read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint has been filed by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India in exercise of his powers under Section 45 of the Act 2002. It also appears that it is the First Supplementary complaint dated 29th October, 2014 filed in the Complaint dated 18th July, 2014 in the P.M.L.A Case...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Arvind Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. The following two questions have been referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the Tribunal's order dated 30.07.1997 in ITA No. 3687/1992: "(1) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT(A) in allowing the claim of depreciation on guest house? (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT(A) in holding that since the Octroi was paid to the Ahmadabad Municipal Corporation it was not hit by the provisions of section 40A(3)." 2. The assessee had filed appeal before CIT(A) against the order of DCIT(Asstt.) Spl., Ahmadabad under section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment years 1988-89 as the assessing office disallowed all the expenses on gues house including depreciation. CIT(A) allowed the claim of depreciation of Rs. 109180 and the disallowance of rent expenses was confi...
Pankaj Pratapbhai Thakkar and Others Vs. Deputy Director and Another
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-2014
1. Issue Notice to the respondents returnable on 19th November, 2014. Mr. Soni, the learned APP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondent no.2State of Gujarat. 2. The principal contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is with regard to the legality and validity of the order of issue of warrant passed by the Designated Judge under P.M.L. Act 2002, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur, Ahmedabad dated 29th October, 2012. 3. It appears that a complaint has been lodged against the applicants herein for the offence of money laundering punishable under Section 4 of the Act 2002, read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint has been filed by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India in exercise of his powers under Section 45 of the Act 2002. It also appears that it is the First Supplementary complaint dated 29th October, 2014 filed in the Complaint dated 18th July, 2014 in the P.M.L.A Case...
Shweta Park Co-Op. Hsg. Society Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-2014
Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J. 1. Petitioner No. 1 is a Cooperative Housing Society. Petitioners No. 2 and 3 are its Office Bearers. The petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to remove the superstructure standing on a plot of land earmarked as plot No. 3 in Part -I of the petitioner No. 1 - Society. Brief facts are as under: Petitioner No. 1 - Society was constituted in the year 1962. It is a tenant ownership society. Plot No. 3 of part -I of the Society was initially allotted to one Shri J.V. Thakker. In October 1986, said Shri Thakker applied to the society for transfer of the said plot in the name of Rekhaben Champaklal Sheth. 2. It appears that against said Rekhaben Champaklal Sheth, the authority under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 ('SAFEMA', for short) instituted proceedings for forfeiture of her property. The competent authority passed an order on 22 -3 -1988 forfeiting Rekhaben's said plot. Rekhaben surrend...
Imtiyazbhai @ Into Sahebkhan Kureshi Vs. State Of Gujarat and Another
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-05-2014
Oral Order: 1. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered at C.R. No.I- 33 of 2014 with Umalla Police Station, Bharuch. 2. Since the respondent State of Gujarat has opposed this bail application mainly on the ground that this application is filed for anticipatory bail under section 438 of Code of the Criminal Procedure and since the applicant has committed the offence under the provision of SC/ST Act, hence he is not entitled for such prayer which is specifically barred under the provision of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act. 3. Brief facts arise from the record are as under: 3.1 That one lady namely Afsana - wife of the Kalubhai, one of the accused in the present case, eloped with one Anilbhai and stayed at Allahabad for few days. Subsequently pursuant to compromise arrived at between the parties, the said lady we...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »