Gujarat Court January 2016 Judgments
Prakriya Pharmacem Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward -7
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-2016
Akil Kureshi, J. 1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act. The petitioner has challenged notice dated 24.02.2015, produced at Annexure 'A' to this petition, issued by the respondent- Assessing Officer, to re-open assessment for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Brief facts are as under. For the assessment year 2010-11 the petitioner had filed its return of income on 22.07.2010 declaring loss of Rs.2.69 lacs (rounded off). Such return was accepted without scrutiny. Thus, no scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) came to be framed in that case. 3. The Assessing Officer, in order to re-open such assessment, issued the impugned notice dated 24.02.2015 at the request of the petitioner. He also supplied reasons recoded by him for issuing notice. Such reasons read read as under: " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .It is seen that the assessee has transferred 5,30,410 shares during year under consideration whose market v...
Tag this Judgment!Nadim Dilip Bhai Panjvani Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 3
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-11-2016
Akil Kureshi, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties for final disposal of the petition. The petitioner has challenged an order dated 20.07.2015 as at Annexure N to the petition in following factual background. 2. The petitioner, on 24.03.2014, was travelling from Morbi to Rajkot carrying cash of Rs. 20,07,000/-. According to him, he had to handover such cash to his friend Manoj P. Rajdev. The vehicle, in which, the petitioner was travelling, was intercepted by the police authorities being the election period for general election to the parliament. The police authorities, after being satisfied that the cash, which the petitioner was carrying, had no connection with the ensuing election, informed the Income Tax Department which, later on 25.03.2014 seized the cash from the petitioner. The case of the petitioner, as reflecting from the present petition is that, the cash belonged to said Shri Manoj P. Rajdev and not to the petitioner. However, since the same was seized from the petit...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R.L. Kalathia and Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-08-2016
Harsha Devani, J. 1. By this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") the appellant - revenue has called in question the order dated 22ndOctober, 2002 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in I.T.A. No. 2731/RJT/2000. 2. By an order dated 31st March, 2003, this appeal came to be admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the sale of business of firm as a going-concern to the company for a consideration of paid-up share capital does not amount to transfer liable to tax as capital gains?" 3. The assessment year is 1996-97 and the relevant accounting period is the financial year 1995-96. The assessee, a partnership firm, was engaged in the business of construction work as Builder/Developer/Contractor. The return of income came to be file...
Tag this Judgment!Hansaben Bachubhai Solanki Vs. State of Gujarat Throu. Executive Engin ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-07-2016
Oral Judgment: S.R. Brahmbhatt, J. 1. Heard learned advocate for the parties. The appellant, who happened to be the respondent in S.C.A. No.3142 of 2014, has takenout these proceedings of L.P.A., challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 8th September 2014, whereby the learned Single Judge, allowed the writ petition and made the rule absolute, quashing and setting aside the order of the labour Court, Bhavnagar dated 5th June 2013 in Reference (L.C.B.) No.326 of 2005, which had effect of partly allowing the reference of present appellant and granting her 50% backwages from 24th January 2008 and reinstatement in service. 2. The facts in brief as could be culled-out from the proceedings would indicate that the appellant had been engaged for watering the plants and doing manual job in the office of the respondent “ employer in the year 1978 and she was continued as such till 11th February 1986. Thereafter, without following due procedure of law, her se...
Tag this Judgment!Olwin Tiles (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
Akil Kureshi, J. 1. These petitions arise in common background. They have been heard together and would be disposed of by this common judgment. For convenience, we may refer to the facts arising in SCA No. 17307 of 2015. 2. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act. For the Assessment Year 2011-12, the petitioner filed return of income on 17.10.2011 declaring nil income. Such return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) and thus accepted without any scrutiny. The Assessing Officer later on issued impugned notice dated 02.03.2015 under Section 148 of the Act seeking to reopen the assessment of the petitioner for the said Assessment Year 2011-12. He supplied to the petitioner the reasons recorded for issuing such notice, which read as under: ” "In this case, on verification of records, it is found that the Assessee is a Private Ltd. Company engaged in the business of Manufacturing of Ceramic Tiles. On the basis of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›