Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)3GLR1982
H. H. MEHTA, J. 1.The appellant who was an accused in Sessions Case No. 358 of 1995 before the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Ahmedabad, has, by preferring this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') read with Section 36B of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the 'N.D.P.S. Act'), challenged the correctness and legality and validity of judgment Exh. 52 dated 11th September, 1997 rendered in Sessions Case No. 358 of 1995 by which the appellant has been convicted of the offences punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 20(b)(ii) read with Section 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lac and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for one year for the offence committed by him under Section 2Q(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act. The learned Judge of the trial Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2004)2GLR1117
Akshay H.Mehta, J.1. This group of appeals has been filed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation under Section 411 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') challenging the judgments and the assessments of the GRV of the concerned properties made by the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad. The Small Causes Court in the Municipal Valuation Appeals filed before it, has upset the valuation done by the Assessment Officer of the appellant and instead has fixed its own, which is not acceptable to the appellant herein. Since they involve common questions of facts and law, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The concerned properties are situated within the areas of Ahmedabad City which are subjected to imposition of property tax. For this purpose, appellant has made the assessment of the tax of the said properties, which according to it, is done in consonance with the provisions relating to the property tax as contained in the Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2002)4GLR3405
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. This is a revision under section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 at the instance of the original plaintiff landlord who had sued the respondent-defendant tenant for a decree of eviction of the rented premises under section 12 and 13 of the Bombay Rent Act.2. The petitioner-landlord had sued the respondent-tenant for a decree of eviction on two grounds viz. (1) that the tenant was in arrears of rent for more than six months on the date of the suit notice, and that the tenant had not paid up the amount within 30 days of receipt of the suit notice and (2) that the tenant had made a permanent construction on the rented premises without the prior written consent of the landlord.3. The trial court, after taking into consideration the pleadings of the parties, framed appropriate issues, and after recording the evidence and hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties, rejected the landlord's claim for eviction on the ground...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2001]250ITR542(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J.1. In view of the order made by the Division Bench of this court on September 21, 1995, referring the matter to a larger Bench and in view of the order made by the Chief Justice on March 29, 2000, this matter is placed before this larger Bench.2. Before reverting to the question of law, in the instant case it would be most appropriate to refer to the facts of the case.3. There was a transaction of lease-hold rights in the property in question and not a sale of ownership rights. A document dated August 3, 1968, purporting to create only leasehold rights was admitted to be of no value as the transaction was entered into without the written consent of the owner of the building, i.e., the original lessor. It seems that after some time, the consent of the owner of the property, i.e., the original lessor was obtained and the lessee (the assessee) executed a lease deed on October 13, 1973, transferring lease-hold rights in favour of the transferee. The Tribunal has recorded a fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2001)2GLR1450
Y.B. Bhatt, J. 1. The petitioners herein challenge the demand raised by the Municipality arising from grant of occupancy rights in respect of certain shops to the petitioners by way of public auction, the demand having arisen from the terms and conditions of the auction.2. Certain facts are not in dispute and/or indisputable.3. The respondent-Municipality had constructed a shopping centre which was in the form of a number of shops. The Municipality had issued a public notice for auctioning the said shops. The petitioners participated in the said auction and the respective petitioners were successful bidders at the auction in respect of Shop No. 36, Shop No. 4, Shop No. 34 and Shop No. 8 respectively. The petitioners, as successful bidders in respect of particularly these four shops, were required to pay occupancy price as demanded by the Municipality. Possession was handed over in respect of the relevant shops to each of the petitioners. The petitioners, are thereafter, occupying the r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2001(74)ECC51; 2005(179)ELT129(Guj); (2001)4GLR3630; 2006[2]STR300; [2007]7STT29
M.S. Shah, J. 1. In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Chartered Accountants' Association and the Gujarat Institute of Civil Engineers and Architects have challenged the constitutional validity of Section 88 of the Finance Act, 1997, and Section 116 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, levying service tax on consulting engineers and architects and also on practising chartered accountants. 2. The Gujarat Institute of Civil Engineers and Architects is a registered association of engineers and architects of Gujarat. It has about 2,600 members and Special Civil Application No. 7220 of 1999 is filed on their behalf. Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 in the said petition are consulting engineers and past/present office bearers of the said association. 3. The Chartered Accountants' Association is an association of 1,000 practising chartered accountants in the State of Gujarat. Special Civil Application No. 469 of 1999 is filed by the association on behalf of its members. Petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2001)165CTR(Guj)620; [2001]252ITR354(Guj)
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-company has raised a challenge against the order dated July 29, 1992, passed by the respondent, under Section 264(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the I.T. Act'), whereby, the revision petition, which pertained to the assessment year 1989-90, came to be dismissed.2. In essence, the factual matrix is not much in controversy. The question which has come up for determination and adjudication in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is whether, the exercise of statutory, discretionary power by the respondent in not entertaining the revision is justified or not ?3. Firstly, it is contended that the exercise of discretion by the respondent in dismissing the revision is not legal as the action of closing or treating the income return as invalid was not exercised reasonably and justly depriving the petitioner-assessee of his right to have return assessed on the merits. Alternatively...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1998]231ITR529(Guj)
R. K. ABICHANDANI J. - The following questions had been referred to this court for its opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the above two references :Income-tax Reference No. 216 of 1977 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the distributions received by the assessee from various discretionary trusts were assessable only in the hands of the trustees of the respective trusts under section 164 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and not in the hands of the assessee 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 11,990 received by the assessee from various discretionary trusts is exempt from tax inasmuch as the said sum was paid out of dividends received by the trusts which were exempt under section 80K of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'Income-tax Reference No. 268 of 1977 :'1. Whether, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1998)147CTR(Guj)391
R. K. ABICHANDANI, J. :The following questions had been referred to this Court for its opinion under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, in the above two references :IT Ref. No. 216 of 1977 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the distributions received by the assessee from various discretionary trusts were assessable only in the hands of the trustees of the respective trusts under s. 164 of the IT Act, 1961, and not in the hands of the assessee ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 11,990 received by the assessee from various discretionary trusts is exempt from tax inasmuch as the said sum was paid out of dividends received by the trusts which were exempt under s. 80K of the IT Act, 1961 ?'IT Ref. No. 268 of 1977 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the distribution...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1997)139CTR(Guj)428; [1997]226ITR781(Guj)
R.M. Doshit, J. 1. The matter at dispute in this group of petitions is seizure of gold weighing 50 kgs brought in this country by these 10 Writ Petitioners from a foreign country [hereinafter referred to as 'the gold']. 2. Since the matter centres around the gold, an object of universal avarice, searched and seized by the IT authorities we shall first discuss the law pertaining to search and seizure under the IT Act. Section 132 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') empowers the Director General or Director or the Chief CIT or the Dy. CIT as may be empowered in this behalf by the Board, inter alia where he has reason to believe that any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the Act, to enter any building or place where he ha...
Tag this Judgment!