Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-29-1984
Reported in : [1985]151ITR389(Guj)
Poti, C.J.1. The question raised in this special civil application under article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing the ITO to pay interest under s. 214(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, is one on which differing views have been expressed by the High Courts in India. The matter arises under the I.T. Act, 1961. In a case where an assessee pays advance tax under ss. 207 to 213 in excess of the amount of tax determined on regular assessment, provision is made for payment by the Central Government of interest on the excess under s. 214(1) of the Act. The interest is payable for the period from the 1st of April next following the financial year in which advance tax is paid and in cases where any such instalment is paid after the expiry of the financial year during which it is payable, the interest on such instalment will run from the date of payment. As to the point of commencement of the period for which interest is thus payable under s. 214(1) there is no controvers...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jun-26-1984
Reported in : (1984)2GLR1477
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution which in substance is one under Article 227 thereof, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the Prant Officer, Dohad in Private Forest Acquisition Case No. 6 of 1974 and as confirmed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in TEN. A. A. 264 of 1976. By the impugned orders, the petitioner's claim for compensation for acquisition of trees situated in the private forest belonging to the petitioners which came to be acquired under the provisions of the Gujarat Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1972, hereinafter referred to as the. 'the Acquisition Act' came to be rejected by both the aforesaid authorities.2. In order to highlight the grievance of the petitioners, a few relevant facts which emerge well established on the record of this case deserve to be noted at the outset. The petitioners were proprietary Jagirdars of village Taladara situated in Santrampur taluka of Panchmahals district. In this village are ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-13-1984
Reported in : [1986]59CompCas201(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The applicant company has taken out this summons for directions by this court under section 536(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, in the matter of financial arrangement between the applicant company on the one hand and the Industrial Development Bank of india, the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd., the Industrial Finance Corporation of India, the Industrial Reconstruction Corporation of India Ltd. and the Bank of India on the other, so as to ensure the said financing agencies that the dispositions of the proper ties in the favour may not be avoided in future also for the direction that not payment of any moneys which may be effects by the company at any time between the presenting of winding up petitions which have been stayed and the date of the order of winding up, if at all made on one or more of such of the petitions and no disposition of any property or assets which may be effected by the company during the aforesaid period in favour of any p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-16-1984
Reported in : (1985)2GLR1029
R.A. Mehta, J.1. These matters arise out of the final decree for redemption of mortgaged property. The questions involved are regarding the accounts taken and the amounts determined to be due for redemption of the mortgaged property. The trial court held that a sum of Rs. 5,441/- was due to the mortgagee and the plaintiff was directed to pay the same within six months from the date of the decree (30th October 1974) and the mortgagee defendant No. 1 was to give possession of the mortgaged property on receipt of the said amount. The trial court had worked out the amount as follows:1. Rs. 400/- Principal amount.2. Rs. 1668/- Interest on principal amount of Rs. 400/- for the period from 6-7-35 to 6-4-70 at rate of Re. 1/- perhundred per month without cumulative interest.3. Rs. 2958/- For expenses.Rs. 617/- surface and floor repairing after 6-9-1951.Rs. 400/- water connection in 1954. (S. Y. 2010)Rs. 225/- electric connection No. 1962.Rs. 853/- for construction of ladders and wooden ladder ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-23-1984
Reported in : AIR1986Guj35
Mehta, J.1. This matter illustrates what injury, damage and injustice a long lasting interim injunction can do to a defendant who succeeds finally. The question that arises here is whether such injury and injustice is redressable or is without a remedy. Does our system of administration of justice administer justice or injustice. If injustice and injury results by an interim injunction obtained by a party and granted by Courts, can the aggrieved party ask for compensation on proof of direct damage suffered by it? The appellant contends that the interim injunction obtained by it had judicial sanction and, therefore, even if the appellant ultimately failed and even if any direct damage is proved to the other side, it cannot be redressed and the Court cannot give any relief.2. The learned City Civil Court Judge had held that the appellant is liable in tort of abuse of process of Court and has passed a decree against the appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/-with costs and interest in Civil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jul-16-1984
Reported in : AIR1985Guj68
ORDER1. In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner who is an occupant of a structure standing on a plot bearing No. BBZ-N2 of Gandhidham, has challenged the order passed by the Board of Appeal under S. 19 of the Gandhidham (Development and Control on Erection of Buildings) Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as the Gandhidham Act. As the said Board has passed the order deciding the lis between the parties in a quasi-judicial manner, even though the said Board is not deemed to be a civil court, its decision will be amenable to the jurisdiction of this court under Art. 227 of the Constitution. This petition is, therefore, treated to be one under Art. 227 thereof and is being disposed of accordingly. The respondents to this petition are, the Gandhidham Development Authority which is joined as respondent No. 1 and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 who are the owner of the house property bearing No. BBZ-N-2, and the Board of Appeal respectively.2. It is necessary to briefly g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-15-1984
Reported in : AIR1986Guj24; (1985)2GLR1
P.S. Poti, C.J.1. The question that arises in this appeal concerns the enhancement of compensation in respect of 4165 sq. mtrs. of land in survey No. 404 bearing Final Plot No. 347 of Town Planning Scheme No. 22 of village Vasna. The acquisition is for the Telephone Exchange Building. Notification under S. 4 Land Acquisition Act, D/- 10-11-1970 was published in Government Gazette on 3-12-1970. The two documents available for the purpose of estimating the value of the acquired land are Ex. 47 D/- 18-10-1969 and Ex. 48 D/- 24-10-1969. These are plots comprised in survey No. 407. The learned Judge has noticed that the documents relating to these lands shows the land value of Rs. 37.44. per sq. metre in one case and Rs. 34.97 per sq. metre in the other case. Even so the Court has adopted Rs. 30/- per sq. metre for the acquired land only for the reason that the acquired land was of much larger area than the land acquired under Exs. 47 and 48. The extent of the area is not the real test. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-18-1984
Reported in : (1984)2GLR858; [1984]150ITR276(Guj)
P.S. Pott, C.J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the assessee, a registered firm and relates to the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 the corresponding accounting years being those ending on June 30, 1969 and March 25, 1970. One Shri C. S. Virani was partner of the applicant firm and he joined the partnership representing the HUF of which he was the 'karta'. For the two accounting years in question, Shri C. S. Virani maintained two accounts with the partnership - one his own individual account and the other of the HUF which he represented as 'karta'. The firm paid interest on advances made other than the capital by the HUF represented by Shri C. S. Virani and also advances made by Shri Virani from his own personal account. The interest so paid on individual funds for the assessment year 1970-71 was Rs. 1,30,594 and interest paid on account of the HUF was the sum of Rs. 36,482. These payments were disallowed by the ITO who relied on s. 40(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for adoptin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-14-1984
Reported in : (1985)44CTR(Guj)134; [1985]152ITR26(Guj)
Mankad J.1. The question that has been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Branch 'A' (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for our opinion runs as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the service of notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act prior to commencement of section 263 proceedings did not make the Commissioner's order legally infirm ?' 2. The question arises in the following circumstances. The assessee is a registered partnership firm and the assessment year under reference is 1971-1972, previous year being the year ending on December 31,1970. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 1971-72 on June 28, 1971. The Income-tax Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'ITO' for brevity's sake) by an order dated March 18, 1974, passed under s. 143(1) of the Act, assessed the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-19-1984
Reported in : AIR1985Guj187; (1985)1GLR374; (1985)1GLR374
1. The present appellant Maganbhai Chhotubhai Patel is the original defendant and husband of present respondent (original plaintiff) Maniben alias Kikiben alias Laxmiben.2. The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dt. 22-4-1975, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Navsari, in Special Civil Suit No. 3 of 1970, awarding to the plaintiff-wife maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month from the date of the suit, i.e. 2-4-1969, as also the arrears of maintenance that had accrued due till then within a period of two months from the date of the judgment, i.e. 22-4-1975, has filed this appeal. The respondent-wife also being dissatisfied with the paltry amount of maintenance of Rs. 250/- per month has filed Cross-Objections, claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month with arrears that had accrued due at the said rate. For the sake of convenience, hereafter the appellant will be referred to as 'the defendant husband' and the respondent as 'the p...
Tag this Judgment!