Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: gujarat Year: 1995 Page 1 of about 18 results (0.028 seconds)

Jan 27 1995 (HC)

Sarvoday Corporation Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Jan-27-1995

Reported in : (1995)1GLR196

..... . the answer to this question necessarily must be given in negative, regard being had to the clear provisions contained under section 24 of the indian electricity act, 1910. the precise rationale behind the negative answer is the clear concept that the commercial complex cannot be said to be a legal representative of the defaulter consumer unit whereat the former may represent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1995 (HC)

Shakti Auto Garage and ors. Vs. the Assistant Regional Transport Offic ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-09-1995

Reported in : AIR1996Guj54; (1995)2GLR1137

..... vehicle and, therefore, the authority should not insist on compliance of mandatory provisions of rule 126 is also meritless and hence unsustainable. such a contention as such defies the logic, rationale and legal policy and purpose incorporated in the provisions of rule 126. as discussed hereinbefore, it is mandatory and statutory for manufacturer of any motor vehicle to submit prototype model .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 1995 (HC)

Banyan and Berry Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Dec-21-1995

Reported in : (1996)131CTR(Guj)127; [1996]222ITR831(Guj)

..... else it shall be deemed to be a mere device to avoid tax, as if person has no freedom to carry or not to carry on trade. we see no rationale to support this. 36. taking any other view would mean that a firm can never cease to exist unless it is fully wound up and last penny of assets or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 1995 (HC)

Raghuvir Prasad Mali, Secretary, Maha Gujarat Mill Mazdoor Union Vs. t ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Nov-21-1995

Reported in : (1996)1GLR533; (1996)IILLJ546Guj

..... recognise the first and exclusive right of the representative union, except in matters pertaining to industrial dispute between the employer and the employees, so as to facilitate collective bargaining. the rationale is that it is in the interest of industrial peace in public and national interest that the employer should have to deal, in matters which concern all or most of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 1995 (HC)

Ojas V. Khokhadagi and ors. Etc. Etc. Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Excha ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Feb-08-1995

Reported in : AIR1996Guj23; [1996]87CompCas419(Guj); (1995)2GLR1891

..... points is an annexure i. the complete list of applicants, the marks obtained by each and the names of selected members must be made public.....'the said criteria and the rationale were elaborated further. with regard to education, it was stated that it was necessary to ensure that all brokers had demonstrably high level of familiarity with all aspects of security .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 1995 (HC)

Haryana Ship-breakers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Feb-06-1995

Reported in : 1997(96)ELT541(Guj); (1996)1GLR623

a.p. ravani, j.1. in all these petitions common questions of law and fact arise. therefore, at the request and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, all these four petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, affidavit-in-reply filed in special civil application no. 640 of 1990 is treated as affidavit-in-reply in all the four petitions. 2. the petitioners are engaged in the business of ship-breaking. for the purpose of their business, they import ship at alang shipyard in bhavnagar district. the import duty is leviable on the vessels for breaking up as provided under chapter 89, heading 89.08 and sub-heading 8908.00 of customs tariff act, 1975. the duty is leviable at 40 per cent ad valorem plus rs. 1,400/- per light displacement tonnage (l.d.t.). note 2 of the chapter reads as follows : '2. in heading no. 89.08 'light displacement tonnage (l.d.t.)' means l.d.t. in metric tonnes as per builder's registered l.d.t. referred to in the stability book or the builder's certificate at the time of initial commissioning of the vessel or the floating structure : provided that in case of any change in the l.d.t., the highest of the l.d.t. indicated in any of the documents referred to above shall be taken for the purpose of levy of duty.' 3. the petitioners in all these petitions have challenged the constitutional validity of note 2 in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1995 (HC)

Mihir Textiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-05-1995

Reported in : (1996)135CTR(Guj)412; [1997]225ITR327(Guj)

rajesh balia, j. 1. the aforesaid reference has been made by the income-tax appellate tribunal, ahmedabad bench 'c', ahmedabad. from the statement of case submitted by the tribunal, it appears that while three questions have been referred at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, as many as seven questions have been referred to this court for its decision at the instance of the assessee. the issues raised in this reference relate to the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1975-76.2. the questions referred to the opinion of this court at the instance of the revenue which are reproduced hereinbelow :' 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 expenditure on items like gas and electricity expenses, motor car, personal accident insurance premium, telephone expenses were not in the nature of perquisites for the purpose of disallowance under section 40a(5) of the income-tax act, 1961 ? 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 expenditure on items like rent allowance, conveyance allowance, medical insurance premium and personal accident premium were not in the nature of perquisites for the purpose of allowance under section 40a(5) of the income-tax act, 1961 ? 3. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1995 (HC)

Paritosh Maghraj Calla Vs. Gujarat University, Ahmedabad and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Aug-29-1995

Reported in : AIR1996Guj188; (1996)1GLR640

orderr.a. mehta, j.1. the petitioner, a student of first year b.com. in the 2nd respondent-h. l. college of commerce, affiliated to the 1st respondent-gujarat university, was not admitted to the first year b.com. university examination and his application form was withdrawn by the college as he did not pass the internal evaluation in five out of seven subjects. for internal (college) evaluation, the maximum marks are 30 in each subject and 70 marks are for the external (university) examination. the standard of passing is 36%. of marks obtainable. the petitioner obtained the following marks in each of the seven subjects out of 30.subjectsmarks obtained out of 301. english232. commercial communication-1113. economics-i64. accountancy35. business organisation & management-i86. principal subject-advance accountancy87. subsidiary subject-computer programming82. this refusal to admit to the university examination is based on regulation f.b. com.i, 2(i) which provides that no candidate who has not passed in atleast half the number of heads for internal evaluation shall be admitted to the university examination concerned. the petitioner has challenged the validity of this regulation.3. pending the petition, by an interim order, the petitioner was directed to be allowed to appear in the examination and he has appeared in the examination. though the result is not declared, it is assumed that he has obtained the passing marks in the external examination.4. regulation r.com.4 is relating .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 1995 (HC)

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Nivrutt Karmachari Sangh and anr. Vs. ...

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 record, wherein it has been held out that only 86 retired persons, as per the list enclosed with this civil application, are the members of the petitioner-sangh claiming the relief of pension scheme introduced by the municipal corporation, ahmedabad from 1-1-1983. said list is taken on record. the learned counsel for the petitioner-sangh, under the instructions from the present president of the petitioner-sangh, namely, mr. m.h. tripathi, who is present before the court, submits that there may be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 09 1995 (HC)

Tilak Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Feb-09-1995

Reported in : 1995(79)ELT210(Guj); (1995)1GLR498

j.n. bhatt, j.1. the main question in focus in this group of 13 petitions, under article 226 of the constitution of india, is whether, the classification of goods and the structure of excise duty, effected by the taxing statues for the purpose of imposing different and staggered rate of duty in relation to the relevant processed and blended man-made fabrics, are illegal, and unconstitutional being violative of articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the constitution of india 2. since the common questions are raised in all these petitions, it was, jointly, submitted by the learned advocates appearing for the parties to decide all the petitions together and therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. in this groups of petitions, the petitioners have challenged the legality and validity of four notifications (1) 254/87, dated november 25, 1987; (2) no. 262/87, dated 9th december 1987; (3) no. 4/88 and (4) no. 5/88, both dated 19th january 1988, issued in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the central excise rules, 1944 ('1944 rules' for short) read with sub-section (3) of section 3 of the additional duty of excise (goods of special importance) act, 1957 ('1957-act' for short) by the central government in relation to the structure of the excise duty and certain exemptions for man-made fabrics. 4. the petitioners are in the business of manufacturing various fabrics including blended man-made fabrics classifiable under tariff headings no. 54.09, .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //