BHARGAV D KARIA

The assessee-company filed its return for A.Y. 2009-10, and assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 29.12.2011. Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 was issued on 09.03.2015, beyond four years, recording two reasons: (i) wrong computation of disallowance under Section 14A, and (ii) alleged escapement of in…

The Gujarat High Court heard cross‑appeals arising from Special Civil Suit No. 120 of 1979 in which Hanspa Knit (P) Ltd., a company in liquidation, sought recovery of export proceeds from House of Dubary and its partners (defendants 1‑4) and other parties. The trial court had partially allowed the suit, awarding Rs 49,…

The Gujarat High Court heard cross‑appeals arising from Special Civil Suit No. 120 of 1979 in which Hanspa Knit (P) Ltd., a company in liquidation, sought recovery of export proceeds from House of Dubary and its partners (defendants 1‑4) and other parties. The trial court had partially allowed the suit, awarding Rs 49,…

The Commissioner of Income Tax‑I filed multiple tax appeals against Sunilkumar B. Handa. The department, through counsel, sought permission to withdraw these appeals because the tax effect in each case was below the minimum threshold specified in the CBDT circular dated 11 July 2018, which permits the department to pre…

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Commissioner of Income Tax appealed against Kamlesh Damjibhai Yadav in Tax Appeal No. 627 of 2007, which had been decided on only two of seven questions, leaving several issues unresolved. The appellant argued that a restraint order under Section 132(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued in the names of all fou…

The appellants filed a first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging the trial court's dismissal of their suit for specific performance of a 1990 agreement to sale of land in Junagadh. The trial court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the existence of a valid agreement to sale dated 2…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II filed multiple tax appeals (Nos. 1027, 1028, 1116, 1993 of 2008) against Labh Construction & Industries Ltd. The appellant argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores. The learned Senior Standing Counsel relied on Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17‑09‑2024, which …

Kamlesh Jagdishchandra Bhambhat and others filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications alleging contempt against Shri Ankit Pannu, District Development Officer, and others. The applicants contended that a prior order, which formed the basis of the contempt claim, had not been complied with. The respondents argue…

The petitioners, Kamlesh Jagdishchandra Bhambhat & ors, filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications alleging contempt of a prior order. The respondents, including the District Development Officer, were represented by Assistant Government Pleaders. The central issue was whether the order alleged to be in contempt…

Kamlesh Jagdishchandra Bhambhat and others filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications alleging contempt against Shri Ankit Pannu, District Development Officer, and others. The applicants contended that a prior order, which formed the basis of the contempt claim, had not been complied with. The respondents argue…

The heirs of the late Ramshakti Jivandas filed a suit seeking declaration of ownership and an injunction against the heirs of the late Bhalabhai Dahyabhai, alleging that a 2010 sale deed in favour of a third party was fraudulent and that they had been in possession of the land since 1984 under a supplementary agreement…

The applicant, represented by Ms. Jagruti Minhas of Thakkar and Pahwa Advocates, sought condonation of delay in a civil application and was directed to deposit money for the publication of a notice. The Court noted the earlier orders dated 15.01.2026 and 24.03.2026 requiring such deposit. It granted the applicant a one…

The appellant husband filed a first appeal against the Family Court's dismissal of his suit for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. Both parties had been living separately since December 2019 and had executed a customary divorce, but the Family Court dismissed the suit on technical grounds under Section 13(1)(b)…

Mr. Mrudulaben Arvindbhai Thakar filed a contempt application before the High Court of Gujarat against the State of Gujarat and others, alleging non‑compliance with a prior order. The applicant, through counsel Ms. Pratibha Kumavat and Mr. Darshit M. Kamdar, submitted that the order in question had actually been compli…

The petitioner, Pritalben Amitkumar Varma, filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 172‑day delay in filing First Appeal No. 5136/2026. The respondent, Amitkumar Radheshyam Sharma, was represented and waived service of notice of rule. The court examined the averments made in the application and, finding them …

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The petitioners filed a series of miscellaneous civil applications and letters patent appeals before the Gujarat High Court. The court, without examining the merits, directed that the applications should not be pressed at this stage so that the petitioners could file appropriate applications in the correct forum. Conse…

The applicant, Babulal Mohanlal Parmar, filed a petition for condonation of a 279‑day delay in preferring a Letters Patent Appeal. The court previously ordered the matter to be listed on 12 August 2025, directing the applicant's counsel to submit a sick or leave note and make alternate arrangements if necessary. On the…

The applicant, Devanand Raymalbai Herbha, filed a contempt application alleging non‑compliance with a prior order. The respondent, Vikas Sahay, Director General of Police, and another party contested the claim. The applicant's counsel argued that the order had been fully complied with, rendering the contempt allegation…