|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 113 Records
-
1971 (9) TMI 173 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Engineer-in-charge so requires by a notice in writing given under his hand but the contractor shall not be entitled to return any such materials except with such consent and he shall have no claim for compensation on account of any such material supplied to him as aforesaid but remaining unused by him or for any wastage in or damage thereto. This clause which is worded in these terms also indicates that the Government had never any intention of selling such materials (asphalt). In that view of the matter, it is not necessary to decide whether this would amount to a sale within the meaning of section 2(13) of the Act. The learned trial Judge has, therefore, rightly held that these deductions were illegal and he has rightly decreed the claim. This was the only contention urged before us and that contention fails. The appeal, therefore, fails. The appeal is dismissed. Appellant No. 1 to pay the costs of respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 to bear its own costs. Appeal dismissed.
-
1971 (9) TMI 172 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tive remedy by way of appeal, and had in fact resorted to such a remedy by filing an appeal, we should relegate the petitioners to their remedy under the statute and not exercise our jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution. The existence of an alternative remedy is not a bar to the exercise of powers under article 226 of the Constitution, and the court in an appropriate case can grant relief. The lack of jurisdiction to take the assessment proceeding is plainly apparent on the face of the record. Having regard to the circumstances, we are satisfied that we should interfere under article 226 and grant relief to the petitioners. The petition succeeds. It is allowed with costs. A writ in the nature of certiorari shall issue quashing the impugned assessment order dated 28th March, 1970. The respondents are restrained from recovering the sum of Rs. 18,170.98 assessed thereby. In case the amount has been realized it shall be refunded to the petitioner. Petition allowed.
-
1971 (9) TMI 171 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... bay High Court held that cooling plant used to cool caustic soda solution used for mercerising process by a textile mill was a refrigerator within the meaning of item 69 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. Tambe and Desai, JJ., were of opinion that the entry should be given the meaning of the articles as understood in the market, that is to say, in the commercial sense. This decision again is not of much assistance, except to indicate that refrigerators or air-conditioners in entry 4 of Schedule I to the Madras Act should not be given a strained or strange meaning, but that they should be understood as normally people would understand in the commercial sense. On a consideration of all the circumstances, we think that spray booths, dust collectors and textile humidification plants are not air-conditioners within the meaning of entry 4 of Schedule I to the Act. The tax cases are accordingly dismissed with costs (one set) counsel s fee Rs. 250. Petitions dismissed.
-
1971 (9) TMI 170 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... so and the Judge (Revisions) has indeed erred on the side of leniency. Having thus recorded our conclusions, we now turn to the questions Question No. (1) is answered by saying that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the survey report dated 9th May, 1961, was not relevant for the years other than 1961-62. So far as question No. (2) is concerned, we answer it by saying that the suppression detected in the year 1961-62 could not by itself justify an inference that the assessee must have suppressed the sale in other years, but coupled with other circumstances of the case, the suppression detected in the year 1961-62 was relevant while making assessment for the remaining years. Question No. (3) is answered by saying that there was material for rejecting the assessee s account books for the years other than 1961-62. The assessee shall pay the costs to the Commissioner which we assess at Rs. 100. There will be one set of cost only. References answered accordingly.
-
1971 (9) TMI 169 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of the assessment year 1965-66. The survey report certainly casts a doubt on the veracity of account books of the assessee for the assessment year in question, but suspicion cannot take the place of material or evidence. Each assessment year is a self-contained unit of assessment and the assessment for each year must be based upon the material relevant for that year. In the instant case admittedly the material discovered did not point to any suppression or evasion in the year 1965-66. We, therefore, agree with the contention of the assessee that the survey report constituted no material for rejecting his books of account. Since that was the only material upon which the rejection of the account books was based, it must be held that the rejection was improper and illegal. Accordingly we answer the question in the negative in favour of the assessee and against the Commissioner. The assessee is entitled to his costs which we assess at Rs. 50. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1971 (9) TMI 168 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nition of tobacco read with the definition of manufacture . Serial No. 35 in the schedule of 1957 notification merely adopts the definition of tobacco as given in 1944 Central Act and has nothing to do with the rate of excise duty to be imposed and the classification of goods for that purpose. On the aforesaid analysis the contention urged by the learned standing counsel has no substance. 10.. Our view gets support from S.T. and B. Merchants Association v. A.S. of Sales Tax 1960 11 S.T.C. 808., where a Division Bench of the Patna High Court arrived at the identical conclusion on construction of similar notifications under the Bihar Sales Tax Act. 11.. On our aforesaid conclusion the writ application is allowed. A writ of certiorari be issued quashing the assessment order in annexure I and a writ of mandamus be issued restraining the opposite party from realising sales tax assessed. In the circumstances, parties to bear their own costs. PATRA, J.-I agree. Application allowed.
-
1971 (9) TMI 167 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Tribunal and was also advanced before us by Mr. H.L. Agarwal in Tax Case No. 57 of 1966. This was with regard to the effect of section 47 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959, which repealed the previous Act of 1947. There is a proviso to that section which saves any right, title, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or for anything done or suffered in respect of the period immediately preceding the repeal from being affected by the repeal. According to Mr. Agarwal, his client in no case could be liable to pay tax except for a period of one year immediately preceding the repeal. As this question was not referred to the court by the Tribunal, we declined to deal with this question. Further, the aforesaid argument was rejected by the Tribunal on account of the interpretation put by it on the expression Period , and we have already answered what is the meaning of the expression period in section 13(5) of the Act. B.D. SINGH, J.-I agree. References answered accordingly.
-
1971 (9) TMI 166 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f this court. Article 226 of the Constitution should not be invoked when sufficient and adequate remedy is available under the statute itself. Besides some of the assessment orders and appellate orders were passed a long time ago and the prayer for quashing those orders is belated. As regards the recovery proceeding, we accept the contention of the petitioners that as karta of the Hindu undivided family, Shiv Narain cannot be arrested for the purposes of recovering the tax due from the Hindu undivided family. The law on the subject was laid down by this court in Baladin Ram Kalwar v. Income-tax Officer 1966 62 I.T.R. 392. The petition is allowed in part in so far that the respondents are restrained from attempting to recover the sales tax due from the Hindu undivided family, Messrs Durjan Mal Raj Kumar, by the arrest of Shiv Narain. In respect of the remaining relief, the petition stands dismissed. In the circumstances, there is no order as to costs. Petition partly allowed.
-
1971 (9) TMI 165 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Officer, because, in our opinion, in the present case the assessee had not denied his liability altogether in the memorandum of appeal. As has been pointed out by the revising authority, the assessee had in his memorandum of appeal admitted the tax to the extent of 2 per cent. and no more. That being the position, it is not open to him now to say that he was not liable to pay any tax at all. The amount of tax calculated at the rate of 2 per cent. has already been found by us to be deficient. In the circumstances we answer the third question by saying that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee was not absolved from the payment of the tax by reason of his having objected to the jurisdiction of the Sales Tax Officer. As all the questions have been answered against the assessee and in favour of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the department is entitled to get costs which we assess at Rs. 100. There would be one set of costs only. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1971 (9) TMI 164 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of KeralaT.R.C. No. 46 of 1969., wherein the learned judges were of the view that the goods required for a tea grower in the course of his agricultural activity, which precedes the industrial activity, cannot be normally included in the certificate. With the utmost respect to the learned Judges, I am unable to fall in line with the view expressed, as the Supreme Court has clearly given expression to the real intendment and purport of rule 13 read with section 8(3)(b). In the view I hold that the goods enumerated in exhibit P-11 annexed to the affidavit are necessary for every one of the activities in the chain of business of the petitioner, the order of the respondent suffers from an error apparent and the rule nisi has therefore to be made absolute. These three writ petitions are therefore allowed and there will be no order as to costs. The respondent is directed to amend the certificate as expeditiously as possible in the light of the judgment as above. Petitions allowed.
-
1971 (9) TMI 163 - SUPREME COURT
Whether after the reorganisation of States, the Sales Tax Officer, Balaghat, had no jurisdiction to assess the sales tax in respect of the sales from the mines in the Nagpur and Bhandara districts which no longer formed part of the State of Madhya Pradesh?
Held that:- Appeal allowed.The High Court has disposed of the matter mainly on the interpretation of section 78 of the Act of 1956 with which we are unable to agree. For these reasons the judgment of the High Court is set aside and the matter is remanded to it to redecide the same and while doing so all the material points that arise for determination will also have to be decided by it.
-
1971 (9) TMI 162 - SUPREME COURT
Whether Goa and Pondicherry were not States as contemplated by Central Sales Tax Act, 1956?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the case of the sales to dealers in Goa, no doubt the appellant did produce the declarations in the prescribed form but those declarations were not produced within the time prescribed. The notifications issued prescribed that the declarations in question should be produced within the time prescribed therein. We have already held that those notifications were valid notifications. The appellant has suffered because of its own laches.
-
1971 (9) TMI 161 - SUPREME COURT
Whether an agent of a principal who is also a dealer under Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 is entitled to the same rights as his principal has under the Act?
Whether the principal is entitled to the exemption claimed has been left open by the High Court?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The determining factor in all such cases is whether the buyer directly or by implication agree to buy and the seller agree to sell separately the packing material. In this case we are not called upon to go into that question. We merely indicated the approach as a matter of guidance. The question for decision by us lies within a narrow compass and that question is whether the assessee is entitled to claim exemption in respect of packing charges if his principal could have claimed it had it sold the cement itself. On that question, we agree with the view taken by the High Court.
-
1971 (9) TMI 160 - SUPREME COURT
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the transactions are purchases of cotton by the society from its members?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. Therein this court on an examination of various clauses in the agreement held that the relationship between the assessee and its representatives was that of agent and principal and not of vendors and purchasers. Set aside the judgment of the High Court and discharge the answer given by the High Court and answer the question referred to the High Court in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
-
1971 (9) TMI 159 - SUPREME COURT
Whether High Court erred in awarding interest on the principal amount claimed from the date of the suit?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. High Court rightly exercised that discretion. It disallowed the interest claimed by the plaintiff-respondent up till the date of the suit. Before instituting the suit, the respondent had issued a notice to the appellant, calling upon the appellant to pay the money illegally collected from it; but despite that notice, the appellant failed to pay back the amount illegally collected from the respondent. That being so, in our opinion, the High Court was justified in awarding interest on the principal amount from the date of the suit.
-
1971 (9) TMI 158 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the assessee- company is entitled to the exemption under section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, read with rule 27A of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 asked for by it?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the present case the assessee-company has sold the goods in question to certain manufacturers who were manufacturing iron and steel materials. It is also clear from question No. (i) that those gloves were to be used by workmen who were engaged in hot jobs or in handling corrosive substances in the course of manufacture. That being so, it cannot be denied that those gloves had to be used in the course of manufacture.
-
1971 (9) TMI 157 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the Commissioner of Sales Tax acted illegally in exercising his powers of revision under section 39(2) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, in respect of the assessment order dated December 28, 1961, which was passed in respect of the returns submitted on January 30, 1958, and June 17, 1958, and on the basis of the notice in Form XI issued on August 29, 196l?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The former provision prohibits the Commissioner from revising an order which has been made more than two years previously and the latter provision permits him to revise the order till the expiry of three years from the date of the order sought to be revised. Therefore the revenue cannot call into aid the second part of the proviso. The resulting position is that the governing provision would continue to be section 12(1) of the Madhya Bharat Act.
-
1971 (9) TMI 156 - SUPREME COURT
Whether penalty can be levied while making the assessment under sub-section (2) of section 12 of Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 merely because an incorrect return has been filed?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the present case the High Court found that the turnovers involved in the first and the third items were not determined on the basis of any estimate or best judgment. The quantum of turnovers in respect of both these items were based on the assessee's account books. The true position, therefore, was that certain items which had not been included in the turnover shown in the returns filed by the assessee were discovered from his own account books and the assessing authority included those items in his total turnover. For these reasons the High Court was justified in holding that the assessment of the first and the third items could not be regarded as based on best judgment. The penalty thus could not be levied in respect of those two items.
-
1971 (9) TMI 155 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the High Court was right in its opinion that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes was incompetent to enhance the assessment of the assessee, the respondent herein?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The fact that a different procedure is prescribed under the 1959 Act for enhancing the assessment cannot be said to be an infringement of a vested right. No one can have a vested right in a mere procedure.
-
1971 (9) TMI 113 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Oppression and mismanagement – Power of Tribunal on application under sections 397 and 398, Inherent powers of Court
|
