Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-21-1995
Reported in : (1996)132CTR(Guj)102; [1996]220ITR153(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. These four references have been submitted by the Tribunal in respect of the same assessee raising identical issues arising out of the same facts relating to asst. yrs. 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71. 2. The relevant facts appearing from the statement of the case in IT Ref. No. 336 of 1982 are that the assessee had entered into an agreement with J. R. Geigy Basle w.e.f. 1st Jan., 1956 onwards and was getting assistance in the manufacture of wide range of products listed in the agreement as well as vide supplementary agreement from time to time. Tinopal was one such product the assessee was licensed to manufacture under the provisions of this agreement. In the manufacture of Tinopal cyanuric chloride is one of the raw materials and was being consumed in large quantities. Until the assessee decided to manufacture the said raw material by himself, the same was bought from the market. The assessee entered in another supplementary agreement on 14th July, 1965 for ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jun-28-1995
Reported in : (1995)2GLR1369
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. In the present revision application the petitioner is the original plaintiff and appellant in the lower appellate Court, whereas the respondent herein is the original defendant and respondent in appeal.2. The plaintiff had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 67 of 1990 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Navasari for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction, together with injunction application therein at Exh. 5.3. The plaintiffs case was that he was already the owner of block Nos. 33 and 35 of village Bharwadi. He thereupon purchased the adjoining and contiguous lands, viz., block Nos. 38, 39 and 40 from different owners-vendors by registered sale deeds, for the purpose of cultivation. So far as block No. 37 is concerned, the then owner Shri Kuverji Naranji Patel had executed an agreement of sale in favour of plaintiff, had handed over possession to the plaintiff, and had also executed a Kabja receipt in favour of the plaintiff. So far as block Nos. 38, 39...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-27-1995
Reported in : [1995]214ITR276(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. In these petitions, a common question arises about the validity of Circular No. 666 (see [1993] 204 ITR 40) dated October 8, 1993, and Circular No. 681 (see [1994] 206 ITR 299 dated March 8, 1994, respectively, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes ('the Board', for short). The relief claimed is to quash the two circulars and grant reliefs consequential to the main relief. The main thrust of the contentions before this court is whether the provisions of section 194C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), providing for deduction of tax at source applies to payments made by the class of persons on whose behalf these petitions have been filed. 2. Special Civil Application No. 4802 of 1994 has been filed on behalf of the All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants whose members are either advocates, chartered accountants or tax consultants by profession and in the course of carrying on their profession, they are engaged by various persons...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jun-22-1995
Reported in : (1995)2GLR1320
S.D. Shah, J.1. This landlords' revision application under Section 29(2) of Bombay Rents, Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 is against concurrent judgment of two Courts below whereby the Courts have refused the decree of eviction in favour of the landlords and against the respondent-tenant.2. In order to properly appreciate the submissions made by Miss V.P. Shah, learned Counsel for the landlords, the relevant facts giving rise to the present revision application are stated hereinafter briefly:(i) The landlords instituted Reg. C.S. No. 1089 of 1971 which came to be renumbered as Rent Suit No. 638 of 1977 on the establishment of the Court of Small Causes at Surat. The suit was filed for recovery of possession of the premises bearing No. 1598 situated in Ward No. 8 in Gopipura, Surat inter alia contending that the defendant-tenant was a tenant of two rooms on the ground floor of the said building at a monthly rent of Rs. 20/- and Rs. 4/- per month towards municipal taxes. Tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-09-1995
Reported in : (1996)131CTR(Guj)1
M.S. Shah, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions of law have been referred to this Court by Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench B, arising from its order dt. 20th Aug., 1982, in ITA No. 1147/Ahd/80, in respect of the asst. yr. 1977-78 : ' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the exchange difference of Rs. 1,32,993 was allowable as revenue expenditure (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the claim of the assessee for Rs. 16,237 for the royalty paid on trade mark was allowable as revenue expenditure (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing the claim of the assessee for interest under s. 220(2) of the Act as revenue expenditure ?' 2. As far as question No. 1 is concerned, the relevant facts found by the Tribunal are that the assessee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-04-1995
Reported in : (1996)2GLR2
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners who were the members of Malia Gram Panchayat from 1968-73 have challenged the order of the learned District Judge, Junagadh dated 17-2-1984 passed in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 1983 and the order of the Mamlatdar, Malia-Hatina dated 11-1-1983 holding the petitioners liable for loss of tax on buildings and lands for the period from 1-4-1971 upto 30th April, 1973 under Section 317 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961.2. The petitioners were elected as members of the said Panchayat in 1968, the term of which came to an end on 31st April, 1973. The petitioner No. 2 was elected as Sarpanch and the petitioner No. 1 as Upa-Sarpanch. A Gram Panchayat is empowered to levy the taxes and fees at such rates as may be decided by it and in such manner and subject to exemptions as may be prescribed, under Section 178(1) of the said Act, subject to any general or special order of the State Government. Under Clause (i) of Section 178(1), a Gram Panch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-04-1995
Reported in : (1995)2GLR1856
M.R. Calla, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Nivrutt Karmachari Sangh and Mr. Madhusudan P. Dave as its Convener. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Nivrutt Karmachari Sangh (here-in-after referred to as 'the petitioner-Sangh' for short) is an Association of such retired employees of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, who had retired prior to 1-1-1983 as holders of the Contributory Provident Fund ('CPF' for short). This petition was filed in the year 1988 on 12th July, 1988 seeking to challenge the denial of the benefit of Pension Scheme to the employees who had retired prior to 1-1-1983 as the Pension Scheme itself was introduced and made effective from 1-1-1983. At the time of filing of this petition, details of the members of the petitioner-Sangh had not been furnished but through Civil Application No. 623 of 1995 dated 6-4-1995, list of 86 retired employees had been sought to be placed on reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-08-1995
Reported in : (1995)2GLR1530
K.R. Vyas, J.1. The petitioners in these petitions, who were appointed by the District Registrar, Co-operative Societies or through the Liquidators for the purpose of assisting the Liquidators in winding up proceedings of the societies, have claimed status of civil servants and prayed for regularisation of their services from the date of their appointment and to extend all the benefits that are being extended to Government employees.2. It appears that after the Rule was issued in the main petition being S.C.A. No. 2815 of 1983, the petitioners amended the petition and interim relief restraining the respondents from terminating their services was granted by this Court. However, respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the said petition filed civil application for vacating the interim relief and the petitioners filed civil applications claiming salary. In the said civil applications, this Court directed the respondents to pay salary to the petitioners with liberty to terminate their services in acc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-28-1995
Reported in : (1995)2GLR1909
S.D. Shah, J.1. In this group of Civil Revision Applications, the respondent is the judgment-creditor and petitioners are the judgment-debtors (defendants). It appears that the respondent-plaintiff instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 461 of 1988 against Manubhai Dahyabhai Parmar (since deceased) now represented by legal heirs and representatives, who are the petitioners. The suit was filed to recover possession of the suit premises for non-payment of rent commencing from 9-3-1987 at the rate of Rs. 29/- per month till the date of the suit and for further relief of payment of rent or mesne profit at the rate of Rs. 29/- till the possession of the suit premises is handed over to the plaintiff. In such suit, the heirs and legal representatives of the original defendant appeared and contended that the rent at the rate of Rs. 29/- per month was excessive and the standard rent was Rs. 15/-only. It appears at the hearing of the suit, i.e., on 17th March, 1993 before Civil Judge, (SD), a comprom...
Tag this Judgment!