Gujarat Court December 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.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax,CC-2, Baroda Vs. Natubhai M. Makw ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-23-2014
K.J. Thaker, J. 1. Since, the issue involved in both the appeals is common, they are heard together and disposed off by this common judgment. 2. By way of these appeals, the appellant-Revenue has felt aggrieved by the order of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench 'A' (for short, 'the Tribunal'), Dated : 14.06.2006, rendered in IT(SS)A. Nos. 32 and 15/Ahd/2006 for Block Assessment from 01.04.1996 to 02.07.2002 and by the dismissal of the appeal filed by the Revenue, challenging the order of the learned CIT(A) and allowing the assessee's appeal. 3. At the time of admission, this Court framed following question of law for consideration in both appeals; "Whether the ITAT was right in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of Rs.12,83,290/imposed u/s.158BFA(2) of the IT Act, 1961 more particularly when the Assessee has failed to pay the tax in its entirety on the undisclosed income?" 4. Before adverting to the provisions of law, it would be relevant to advert to the factual scenario, which emerges a...
KPT Employees Welfare Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-I
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-2014
KS Jhaveri, J. 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner-Trust has challenged the order passed by the Office of Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-1, Rajkot, whereby, the application of the petitioner-Trust for registration under section 10(23AAA) of the Income-Tax Act, has been rejected. 2. Learned advocate Mr. Hemani for the petitioner trust has submitted that while considering the application for the registration under section 10(23AAA) read with Rule 16C(5), the Commissioner has committed grave error in interpreting the provisions of Act and Rules. The petitioner has pointed out that the Trust, the Trust-deed, which is produced at Annexure-C, is constituted for the benefit of the employees of the Kandla Port Trust (for short 'KPT'). The words "contribution" and "Beneficiar(y/ies)" are interpreted as under: '"Contribution" means the amount contributed by the members periodically and shall include any amount allocated and contributed by KPT. "Beneficiar(y/ies)" means member(s) of th...
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Asstt.) Vs. Kevin Enterprise
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') dated 28.04.2006 in ITA Nos. 762/Ahd/2001 for the Assessment Year 1997-98, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal. 1.1 This appeal was admitted by this Court for consideration of the following substantial question of law: "Whether the ITAT was right in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 42,21,368/- made under the head provision made on account of warranty which is in the nature of contingent liability?" 2. The assessee had made provision of Rs. 42,21,368/- on account of warranty and reduced this figure from the total sales recorded in the books of account. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer held that the assessee having consistently followed mercantile system of accounting provision for contingent or unaccrued liability is not allowable as deduction as ...
Torrent Pharmaceticals Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. This is an appeal by the appellant-assessee, challenging the order of the learned ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', Ahmedabad ('the Tribunal, for short), Dated : 29.12.2006, rendered in ITA No. 856/Ahd/1999 for the A.Y.1994-95, whereby, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeals filed by the assessee. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y.-1994-95 on 30.11.1994, declaring his total income at Rs.7,36,21,130/-. However, the respondent-Revenue assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.21,18,68,970/- vide its order dated 20.03.1997. The assessee challenged the same before the learned CIT(A), which, partly allowed the same. It, however, appears that as the assessee was not satisfied with the same, it carried the matter before the Tribunal by filing two separate appeals, wherein, the Tribunal passed the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal. 3. At the time of admitting this matter, following question of law was framed; "Whet...
Hansaben Vs. Ashwinkumar Kacharabhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-2014
1. This application is filed by the respondent of the First Appeal seeking enhancement in the alimony from that of Rs.1,500/per month fixed by the Family Court in the Family Suit to Rs.10,000/per month. 2. Brief facts are as under: 3. Applicant is wife of present opponent. The husband had filed Family Suit No.50 of 2007 before the Family Court, Ahmedabad, seeking decree of divorce under Section 13 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act for short) on various grounds. The Family Court disposed of such suit by judgment dated 7th June 2011. Husband's Family Suit was allowed in part. Prayer for decree of divorce was not accepted. However, the learned Judge ordered judicial separation between the couple from the date of the judgment and decree. While doing so, the husband was ordered to pay permanent alimony at the rate of Rs.1,500/per month to the wife from 1st June 2009. 4. The husband has filed present First Appeal No.2254 of 2011 challenging the judgment of the Family Court. Such a...
Chandan Steel Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. EX. and S.T.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J. 1. Appeal is Admitted for consideration of the following substantial question of law. "Whether an option of paying 25% of penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was required to be extended to the appellant and whether the orders of the Tribunal declining to extend such option are sustainable in the facts and circumstances of this case - As is apparent from the record, the issue pertains to penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act imposed on the appellant -assessee by the adjudicating authority. As is well known, the penal provision provides for reduction of the penalty to 1/4th if the assessee pays the duty, interest and reduced penalty within 30 days. This aspect even the revenue does not dispute. However, the case of the revenue is that the assessee must exercise such option at the earliest. In the present case, right upto the stage of the Tribunal the assessee did not seek such an option. He in fact liti...
Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) Vs. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. Both these appeals arise out of the common judgment and order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and involve common questions on law and facts and therefore, they are decided by this common judgment. 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the respondent-assessee is a Public Sector Undertaking, having its Registered Office at Vadodara, Gujarat. The assessee filed its return of income on 06.05.1996 for the A.Y. 1996-97. Assessment scrutiny was undertaken and it was noticed that the assessee had distributed gift coupons to its employees, which was not disclosed in its return and therefore, there was short deduction of tax. 3. The Assessing Officer passed the order u/s.201(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A), which was dismissed. Pursuant to the order u/s.201(1) of the Act, penalty u/s.271-C of the Act was levied upon the assessee. 4. Against the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Deversons Industries Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. The assessee is in appeal against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as ITAT) dated 07.07.2006 passed in ITA No. 1267/Ahd/99 for the Assessment Year 1995-96 as well as order dated 18.08.2006 passed in ITA Nos. 1899/Ahd/1999 and 2027/Ahd/2004 for the assessment years 1996-97 and 2000-01 respectively. 1.1 This Court while admitting these appeals formulated the following questions for consideration: "Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law on facts in holding that while computing deduction u/s. 80IA exchange rate difference and duty draw back should be treated to be 'derived' from the industrial undertaking?" 2. The assessee firm is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of dyes. During the years under consideration, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80HHC qua sales tax amount. The Assessing Officer worked out the deduction u/s 80HHC after considering the sales tax and excise duty. On appe...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Winner Business Link (P.) Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeals assailing the following ordersTax Appeal No.Date of Tribunal's orderITA (SS) No.Assessment Year1159/200608/02/062083/Ahd/20052002-031375/200623/12/0530/Ahd/20031989-90 to 1998-99 and upto 17.03.1999.1376/200623/12/05206/Ahd/20041989-90 to 1998-99 and upto 17.03.19991377/200623/12/053221/Ahd/20031998-991378/200623/12/053396/Ahd/20031999-001379/200623/12/053397/Ahd/20032000-011380/200623/12/052197/Ahd/20042001-021443/201130/06/111375/aHD/20092006-071444/201127/05/113624/aHD/20082005-061.1 These matters were admitted by this Court for consideration of the substantial question of law as to whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer invoking the provisions of Section 145(3) of the Act, towards...
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ravi Construction
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-16-2014
K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. This is an appeal by the appellant-Revenue, seeking to challenge the order of the learned ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' (for short, 'the Tribunal'), Dated : 01.02.2002, rendered in ITA No. 2405/AHD/1996 for the A.Y. 1991-92, whereby, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Respondent-assessee, filed its return of income on 15.05.1992, declaring total income at Rs.11,90,459/-. Pursuant thereto, the case of the assessee was examined and the concerned AO, after making certain additions/disallowances, assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.21,44,109/-. The assessee, hence, approached the CIT(A), who partly allowed its appeal. Being aggrieved with the same, the Revenue approached the Tribunal by way of appeal, wherein, the Tribunal passed the impugned order, as referred to in Para-1, herein above. Hence, the present appeal. 3. At the time of admitting the present appeal, this Court framed the following questions of law...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »