|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 242 Records
-
1993 (4) TMI 270 - SUPREME COURT
Levy of sales tax on the cane supplies made from areas in Madras State - Held that:- Appeal allowed. The stipulation in the G.O. Ms. No. 2260 cannot also be relied upon by the State of Tamil Nadu for sustaining the levy. A tax can be levied only by a statutory provision. This is not a case where the State of Tamil Nadu is seeking to enforce any agreement between the parties. It was an assessment under the Madras Act. In such a case, the agreement, if any, incorporated in G.O. Ms. No. 2260 is not relevant. In this view of the matter, it is also not necessary to examine the submission of Sri Poti that the State of Tamil Nadu was not competent to impose such a condition under the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966.
-
1993 (4) TMI 262 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Company – Incorporation of ... ... ... ... ..... wth of the scheme cannot be permitted to be impeded in the national interest. Transformation of economy and industry in the country and to set them on the right path is the purpose for which the scheme has been put into action. Establishment of Indian subsidiaries of foreign companies in accordance with the EHTP Scheme and in accordance with the laws of the country should be free from interference of the courts. Even an interim order in one case can send wrong signals to the foreign entrepreneurs and shake their confidence in the scheme. Accordingly, we reject the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and hold that the approval of the Government of India dated November 25, 1992, does not infringe the interim order of the learned single judge dated October 15, 1992. As already noticed the ground on which the petitioners seek the relief is not available to them as such we are not inclined to grant rule. Accordingly the writ petition and the application are dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 259 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Winding up - Appeals from orders ... ... ... ... ..... ion at all. It is with a view to expedite the trial and conclusion of a litigation before the original authority or court, the Supreme Court has limited the scope of the appellate jurisdiction in the manner stated in Shankarlal Aggarwala s case 1965 35 Comp. Cas. 1 (SC), as well as in Central Bank of India s case, AIR 1967 SC 799. It was also contended before us that the learned company judge was not right in rejecting the request of the appellants either to produce the notes in evidence or to refer to them to refresh the memory of the witness. We do not propose to go into these questions because these questions are most appropriately to be considered in case an occasion arises in future for the appellate Bench to entertain an appeal against the final order made in the proceedings pending before the learned company judge. Consequently, we hold that these appeals are not maintainable. They are accordingly dismissed without expressing any opinion on the merits of the questions.
-
1993 (4) TMI 248 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Circumstances in which a company may be wound up, Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts
-
1993 (4) TMI 247 - HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Winding up – Delivery of property to liquidator ... ... ... ... ..... ing to the provisions of the 1913 Act, it was held that there is no provision in the Act, which permits the liquidator of a company to recover the debts from the debtors of such company by a summary proceeding such as an application to the company judge. It was held that the liquidator has to institute a suit for the recovery of debts. On a bare reading of the provisions of section 468 of the Act and in view of the aforementioned decisions, the instant petition in which prayer made is to direct the respondents as debtors of the company to pay its dues, which are seriously under dispute, is neither competent nor maintainable. There is also no need in this petition to again authorise the petitioner to institute or defend suits and other legal, proceedings since such authorisation has already been given by virtue of an order passed on March 27, 1981, in Company Application No. 1 of 1981. Consequently, it is held that the petition is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected.
-
1993 (4) TMI 240 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Meetings and Proceedings - Representation of Corporation at Meetings of Companies & Creditors, Directors - Power of
-
1993 (4) TMI 239 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Meetings and Proceedings – Length of Notice for Calling Meeting, Director – Interested, not to participate or vote in Board’s proceedings, Register of contracts, companies and firms in which directors are interested
-
1993 (4) TMI 238 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Directors - Power of ... ... ... ... ..... . Kanakaraj J. and of my learned brother, K.A. Thanikkachalam J., dated October 28, 1992, and, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to the equitable relief. Since I have dealt with and decided the applications on the merits, there is no need to go into this argument of learned senior counsel, Mr. P. Chidambaram. For the foregoing reasons, Application No. 5998 of 1992 is dismissed, and in view of the earlier order passed in Applications Nos. 841 of 1992 and 5129 of 1992, no further orders are necessary to be passed except to state that the plaintiff will exercise his powers or functions in accordance with the resolutions dated September 5, 1992, passed by the board of directors of the third defendant company. The order dated October 1, 1992, of J. Kanakaraj J. is only an interim order and the same is subject to this order and for the reasons stated herein. Hence, Application No. 841 of 1992 is ordered and no further directions are necessary in Application No. 5129 of 1992.
-
1993 (4) TMI 221 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Meeting and Proceedings – Length of notice for calling meeting, Presumptions to be drawn where minutes duly drawn and signed, Removal of director,
-
1993 (4) TMI 220 - ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Consumer - Definition of - Complainant, a shareholder in TIL, complained about non-receipt of dividend as complainant had not received dividend amounts due to change of address for over three years and said amounts were sent to Registrar of Companies under section 205A of Companies Act after lapse of three years - Opposite parties opposed said complaint on ground that complainant had not applied to TIL in accordance with provisions of section 205B and in Form II of rules made thereunder, and that remedy lay under Companies Act - Whether District Forum having not considered these objections before ordering refund, its order was liable to be set aside and matter remanded back for fresh consideration - Held, yes
-
1993 (4) TMI 219 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Penalty for wrongful with holding of property ... ... ... ... ..... first instance, must judiciously scrutinise and vigorously examine the revision applications and appeals before granting stay orders. (e)That applications for discharge on frivolous and untenable pleas are required to be speedily and effectively disposed of and are not to be used as handles for protracting the litigation. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The judgment and order of the trial court are set aside. Respondent No. 1-accused is convicted under section 630 of the Companies Act and is ordered to pay a fine in the sum of Rs. 1,000 per month for each month during which the offence has recurred starting from April 1, 1977, until the date of restoration of possession of the premises to the company. The accused is further directed to hand over vacant possession of the two premises to the company latest by September 30, 1993. In the event of the accused committing default of this order, he is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. The appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 218 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Capital gains - Computation of -Assessment year 1974-75 - Assessee, a non-resident company, maintaining accounts in UK, sold certain shares of Rs. 10 at Rs. 22 per share in India - Cost of acquisition of such shares was Rs. 10 per share - Acquisition and transfer of these shares took place in India and purchase and sale prices were expressed in India - Assessee worked out capital gain by converting cost of acquisition of shares into pound sterling at the then prevailing exchange rate and also by converting sale price of shares into pound sterling at rate prevailing at the time of transfer - According to assessee, difference so arrived in pound sterling converted again into Indian rupee could only be treated as capital gain for purpose of assessment under Act - ITO, however, worked out capital gain by taking actual sale proceeds at rate of Rs. 22 and deducting therefrom cost of these shares at rate of Rs. 10 per share - Whether computation made by ITO was justified - Held, yes - Whether place where assessee resides and currency in which money is deposited in bank for purpose of purchase, etc., are relevant factors for determining income arising from transactions where cost of acquisition and consideration for transfer, etc., are all expressed in Indian rupee - Held, no
-
1993 (4) TMI 199 - HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... er 20, 1990, following the decision of the Supreme Court in Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. s case 1991 71 Comp Cas 169, directed the stay of further proceedings in the Letters Patent Appeal, after noticing the fact that the Board had in the said case registered the reference of Kanwar Papers Pvt. Ltd. Registration of a reference was held to amount to pendency of inquiry as contemplated under section 16 of the Act. In the result, the application is allowed and further proceedings in Company Petition No. 4 of 1992 are stayed till further orders reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Board for obtaining its consent to continue with these proceedings or taking such other remedies against the applicant-company as may be deemed fit. Company Petition No. 4 of 1992 In view of the order passed in Company Application No. 2 of 1993, further proceedings in the petition are hereby stayed. Parties are at liberty to get the petition revived by moving an appropriate application.
-
1993 (4) TMI 198 - HIGH COURTOF DELHI
Winding up – Circumstances in which a company may be wound up, Company when deemed unable to pay its debts
-
1993 (4) TMI 184 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Rectification of Mistake ... ... ... ... ..... to review which is not permissible. As has been aptly observed by the Tribunal in its Misc. Order No. 38 and 39/87A, dated 19-2-1987 1989 (41) E.L.T. 308 (Tribunal) dealing with one of the earlier ROMs of the present applicant, ldquo All the contentions raised by the applicants may fall within the realm of an appellant forum which forum is entitled not only to consider the merits of the pleas but also scrutinize the correctness of the decision of the lower forum in regard to the contentions raised. rdquo In the circumstances, the order proposed by the Hon rsquo ble president that the ROM has to be rejected on the ground that the applicants are in effect seeking a review of the final order on merits passed by the Tribunal in the garb of rectification of mistake application, is concurred with. Sd/- (K.S. Venkataramani) Member (T) ORDER 27.In view of the majority decision, the application for rectification of mistake is dismissed. Sd/- (Harish Chander) President Dated 29-7-1993
-
1993 (4) TMI 180 - SC ORDER
Adjudication/Assessment proceedings - Seized documents ... ... ... ... ..... n the summary proceedings under Section 132. 2. emsp There is no grievance that during the regular proceedings which are in progress at present no access is given to the documents. However, the grievance is that although the petitioner is entitled to the original documents, the Commissioner of Income Tax by his letter dated 8-6-1992 accorded sanction for continuing the retention of the account books. If the petitioner is aggrieved by this order or if any such order passed in future he may approach the appropriate forum. The special leave petitions are dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 179 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Precedent - Import - Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... se will meet the ends of justice. 24. emsp Accordingly, the redemption fine in each of the case is reduced to a sum of Rs. 8 lakhs (Rupees eight lakhs only) instead of Rs. 15 lakhs and the penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs in each of the case is reduced to Rs. 1 lakh (Rupees one lakh only). 25. emsp The goods in question shall be released to the appellants on payment of the above redemption fine and penalty and the appellants should also pay the duty on these goods as ordered in the adjudication order which may be fixed by the authorities concerned. 26. emsp The Appeals are disposed of accordingly. The department had filed the cross-objections and on a perusal of the same, we find that the department has not sought any variation of the order which are impugned by the appellants in this case. They are more or less in the nature of para-wise comments on behalf of the department. Hence, the cross objections registered combinedly as C.O. 44/92 is also disposed of in the light of this order.
-
1993 (4) TMI 178 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Money Credit ... ... ... ... ..... o been out of bounds for the Regional Benches. The number of such appeals dealt with by the Regional Benches are, however, legion. A conscious decision about jurisdiction of the Regional Benches for Modvat matter has been taken in a few appeals and this practice is going on smoothly. The mere fact that the Kashmir Vanaspati case related to an exemption Notification issued under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules while Modvat credit is not an exemption does not make the case different for applying the ratio laid down in the decision. As we feel that the said ratio needs to be re-considered for the reasons recorded by us above, we, accordingly, place the matter before the Honourable President of the Tribunal to consider constituting a Larger Bench to consider the, issue in the present matter vis-a-vis the Kashmir Vanaspati decision and decide the question of jurisdiction in matters relating to credit of duty whether they be in terms of the Rules or an exemption Notification.
-
1993 (4) TMI 177 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Unjust enrichment ... ... ... ... ..... Rule 57C of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. However, it was pointed out by the respondents and not controverted by the learned JDR that out of the said amount of Rs. 3,54,189.16 has already been reversed by way of entry No. 283, dated 23-6-1990 and entry No. 413, dated 25-6-1990 in RG 23A Part II and the respondents are ready to reverse the balance amount of Rs. 47,430.84 by making suitable entries in the said RG 23A (Part II) Account. We order accordingly. 13. emsp In the result, Appeal No. E/5088/91-C is rejected. Appeal No. E/5094/91-C is partly allowed so far as it relates to the refund of Rs. 4,01,620/- by way of credit in RG 23A Part II Account. As the appellants have already reversed the entries in the said account as aforesaid for Rs. 3,54,189.16, they are directed to reverse the entreis for the balance amounts of Modvat credit of Rs. 47,430.84. Rest is rejected. 14. Both these appeals stand disposed of accordingly with consequential relief to the respondents.
-
1993 (4) TMI 176 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Currency seized by Customs ... ... ... ... ..... enalise the respondents for not having made over the amount of Rs. 3,10,000/- to the petitioner in the circumstances of the case. 24. emsp However, in making over the sum of Rs. 3,10,000/- to the petitioner, the Special Officer will make over all the interest which has accrued thereon after the same was invested pursuant to the order of this Court. 25. The writ petition is accordingly allowed on the terms stated hereinbefore. 26. There will be no order as to costs. 27. emsp The Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents prays for stay of operation of this Judgment and Order. Such prayer is allowed. There will be a stay of operation of this Judgment and Order for a period of 2 weeks from date. 28. emsp All parties concerned including the Special Officer are to act on a xerox copy of this Judgment and Order, duly signed by the Assistant Registrar of this Court, to be given to them upon their undertaking to apply for certified copy of the judgment on payment of usual charges.
........
|
