|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 422 Records
-
1999 (7) TMI 674 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nce. 4. I have considered over the matter. Rule 13, has conferred the power on the Central Government to issue the notification to permit export of excisable goods in bond without payment of duty for removal of the excisable material without payment of duty. The word used in the rule is ‘export’. In the case of deemed export it is not necessary the goods should be exported outside India as is clear from the definition given, in Para 120. There is no provision under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for granting the exemption in respect of deemed export and it is for the rule making authority to grant or not to grant such exemption. Directions to that effect cannot be given by the Court. The export and deemed export are two different concepts and exporter and deemed exporter constitute different categories or class of parsons. There is no violation of principles of Article 14 of the Constitution. 5. Petition having no force accordingly dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 673 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... d Quadri, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 672 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the appellants have expressed their desire to be searched before the Judicial Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, it has not been complied with and for all these reasons, I am of the view that the Trial Court has not rightly appreciated the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in its proper perspective and wrongly came to the conclusion that they have committed an offence under Section 8(c) read with 21 of N.D.P.S. Act. The prosecution has not let in reliable evidence to bring home the guilt against the appellants and under the circumstance, they are entitled to the benefit of doubt. 19. For the reasons stated above, all the appeals are allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants by the Trial Court are set aside and they are found not guilty under Section 8(c) read with 21 of N.D.P.S. Act and they are acquitted. The fine amount, if any, paid by them shall be refunded to them. They should be set at liberty forthwith if not required for any other case.
-
1999 (7) TMI 671 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... o the police to conduct further investigation. This has been so stated by this Court in Ram Lal Narang v. State (Delhi Admn.) (AIR 1979 SC 1791). The only rider provided by the aforesaid decision is that it would be desirable that the police should inform the court and seek formal permission to make further investigation. In such a situation the power of the court to direct the police to conduct further investigation cannot have any inhibition. There is nothing in Section 173(8) to suggest that the court is obliged to hear the accused before any such direction is made. Casting of any such obligation on the court would only result in encumbering the court with the burden of searching for all the potential accused to be afforded with the opportunity of being heard. As law does not require it, we would not burden the magistrate with such an obligation. For the aforesaid reasons, we are unable to interfere with the order passed by the magistrate. Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 670 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ought from Delhi to the State of U. P. in pursuance of and for the execution of the works contract and, therefore, they were covered by Section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act and the sale value thereof could not have been subjected to trade tax under the U. P. Sales Tax Act. The fact that the sale was ultimately completed in U. P. was of no consequence, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oil India Limited v. Superintendent of Taxes, 1975 U.P.T.C. 335. 6. In view of the above discussions, the Tribunal's order dated 21st March, 1997 cannot be legally sustained and allowing these revision petitions, it is ordered that the dealer's aforesaid appeals shall stand allowed and the assessments for Assessment Years 1988-89 and 1989-90 shall stand set aside and to be remade, in accordance with law and in the light of the above observations. The revisionist will get its costs of these revisions that I assess at ₹ 1500/- each. The revision petitions stands allowed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 669 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... eard counsel. The Civil Appeal is dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 668 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... impair the right of the petitioner-detenu to make an effective representation. 9. For the said reasons, we reject this submission also. 10. Before parting with this case, we would like to point out that absence sim-plicitor of translation of a document or a part of it, in a language ineligible to the detenu would not vitiate a detention order. A detention order would only be vitiated if there is absence of translation of vital document or part of it, which would impair the right of the detenu to make an effective representation. Similarly, we make no bones in observing that the supply of an illegible document or its part simplicitor would not vitiate a detention order. It would only be vitiated if the illegible document or its part is a vital document and would hamper upon the detenu 's' right to make an effective representation. 11. For the said reasons, we do not find any merit in this writ petition and dismiss the same. Rule is discharged. 12. Petition dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 667 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... empowered in that behalf and such signature shall be deemed to be the proper authentication of such order or instrument The above rules do not have the force of obliterating the vibrative force and imprint of natural justice. It is supreme and far above the law, rule, regulation etc. unless the applicability of the rule is expressly dispensed with. The operation of the rule is inherent in every administrative or quasi-judicial functions notwithstanding the in house or business rules framed by the authorities. When the matter is thus crystalline it is inessential for us to explore any further on the above plea urged by the respondent. In the result, Ext. P5 order issued by the Additional secretary is quashed. Consequently, we direct the Government of Kerala to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with the observations made here in above and after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The Writ Appeal is thus allowed. No order as to costs
-
1999 (7) TMI 666 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ka. 4. Mahapalika shall be responsible for maintaining the park and the Block 3 for parking purposes in proper and efficient manner. 5. M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, is divested of any right, title or interest in the structure built by it under or over the park. It shall have no claim whatsoever against Mahapalika or against any other person or authority 6. Block 3 shall vest in Mahapalika free from all encumbrances. Licence of M.I. Builders to enter into the park and the structure built therein is cancelled of which possession is restored to the Mahapalika with immediate effect. No obstruction or hindrance shall be caused to the Mahapalika by any one in discharge of its functions as directed by this order. 7. Restoration of the park and operation of Block 3 for parking purposes shall be completed by Mahapalika within a period of 12 months from today and report filed in the registry of this Court. With the directions aforesaid, the appeals are dismissed with costs.
-
1999 (7) TMI 665 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... at M/s Purvi Petroleum was dishonestly selling blue colored kerosene to those not entitled to it and was thus indulging in black marketing of blue colored kerosene; but, there was hardly any reason for the petitioner to collude with it. There was no necessity for him to do so. There was also no material before the Detaining authority to show that the petitioner had in past committed any illegal act as regards possession, storage and use of blue colored kerosene. All these relevant aspects were not considered by the District Magistrate before passing the detention order. Therefore, the satisfaction arrived at by him cannot be said to be reasonable and genuine. An order of detention passed upon such vitiated satisfaction deserves to be set aside. 6. In the result, we allow this writ petition, quash and set aside the impugned order of detention and direct that the petitioner be set at liberty forthwith, unless his presence is required in jail in connection with some other case.
-
1999 (7) TMI 664 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ethi, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 663 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... onsequential direction that the appellant was not to indulge into and shall desist from indulging into such unfair labour practice. The second modification in the impugned judgment of the High Court will be to the extent that the appellant shall pay to the respondent-workman 1/3rd (i.e. 33 approx.) of back-wages with all other consequential benefits from 22nd June, 1982 till the date of his superannuation i.e. 3rd May, 1995. The said amount shall be paid by the appellant to the respondent within a period of 3 months from the date of this judgment and in case of failure to pay the said amount within that time the appellant shall be liable to pay the said amount with running interest of 12 on the expiry of 3 months from today till the date of actual payment. Subject to the aforesaid modifications in the judgment and final order of the High Court impugned in this appeal, the appeal stands dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1999 (7) TMI 662 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... staisfactory explanation is given. Hence, the Civil Appeal is dismissed. The question of law is left open.
-
1999 (7) TMI 661 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... is without prejudice to any remedy which the appellant may have under ordinary law against the end-users.
-
1999 (7) TMI 660 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ections to take remedial measures. In view of this we are not inclined to keep these appeals in abeyance, particularly, having regard to the fact that material placed before us is found to be inadequate to form an opinion of alleged violation of the said Take Over Code. Further, if these appeals are allowed, the shareholding would go only upto 9.37 per cent which would be below 10 per cent ceiling prescribed at that time under the Code. 13. On the basis of available material placed before us, we do not agree with the respondent company’s contention that these 10 petitioners acting in concert with others have acquired more than 10 per cent of the share capital of the respondent company and thus, there is a violation of SEBI Take Over Code. Accordingly these appeals are allowed and the respondent company is directed to register the transfer of the shares involved in these 10 appeals within one month from the receipt of this order. 14. There would be no orders as to cost.
-
1999 (7) TMI 659 - HOUSE OF LORDS
... ...
... ... ..... recognising that the supply of the transport and delivery services to B.T. by the manufacturers formed part of the same transaction as the supply of the motor cars. For these reasons, and for the reasons given by my noble and learned friend Lord Slynn of Hadley, whose speech I have had the advantage of reading in draft and with which I agree, I, too would allow the appeal. LORD CLYDE. My Lords, I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speeches of my noble and learned friends Lord Slynn of Hadley and Lord Hope of Craighead. For the reasons they give, and with which I agree, I, too, would allow this appeal. LORD HUTTON. My Lords, I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speeches prepared by my noble and learned friends, Lord Slynn of Hadley and Lord Hope of Craighead. For the reasons they give, with which I agree, I, too would allow this appeal. Appeal allowed with costs. Solicitors Solicitor for the Customs and Excise Solicitor, British Telecommunications Plc.
-
1999 (7) TMI 658 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cated in Karnataka. The contention that Zilla Parishads established under the Karnataka Zilla Panchayat, Taluk Panchayat Samithies, Mandal Panchayat and Nyaya Panchayat Act, 1985 and the Nationalised Banks would come within the term Department of Government , was rejected by the Karnataka High Court. It was observed as follows Consistently, the courts have held such statutory bodies having their independent corporate identity as bodies distinct from the Government departments, though, such bodies may withstand the test of being 39 State 39 being 39 other authority 39 for the purpose of article 12 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, there is no merit in the contention raised by the assessee that in respect of sale by it to the Kerala Water Authority, it is entitled to the benefit of reduced rate of tax under S.R.O. No. 1728 of 1993. In the result, we reject both the contentions raised by the assessee. The tax revision case stands dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 657 - SUPREME COURT
Conviction of the appellant under Section 8C read with Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substances Act, 1985
Held that:- In this case, the confessional statement (Ext. P-3) made by the appellant which corroborates the evidence of P.W.1. P.W.1 had taken the appellant to her office and the confessional statement came to be recorded at about 8 P.M., no doubt, while the appellant was in custody of P.W.1. But that by itself cannot be regarded as sufficient to hold that the confessional statement was made by the appellant under pressure or compulsion. Even while giving his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the appellant had not stated what was the nature of the threat given to him or in which manner the pressure was brought upon him. As the samples were prepared in the Court in presence of the Presiding Magistrate and were properly packed and court seal was applied on them and as the chemical analyst had also found the seal intact there is little room for doubt that the sample which was examined by the chemical analyst was a part of M.O.3. In our opinion, the Courts below did not commit any error in holding that what was found from the appellant was heroin. Against appellant.
-
1999 (7) TMI 656 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ne the delay is limited to a period of 30 days. That limitation, however, cannot be made applicable to this Court while exercising jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5.. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we find that a case is made out for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. The delay in preferring the appeal is accordingly condoned. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Virudhunagar, viz., the second respondent herein will now consider the appeal of the petitioner on the merits and in accordance with law. The present writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid circumstances. The petitioner is granted two weeks time to re-submit his appeal if the same becomes necessary. Petitioner will pay a sum of Rs. 1,000 to the respondents towards costs to the counsel for the respondent herein as a condition precedent. Consequently, W.M.P. No. 12281 of 1999 is closed as no order is necessary. Writ petition allowed.
-
1999 (7) TMI 655 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... nctly and separately. There is no dispute that entries 55 and 55-A do not at all mention the word trailer. The word trailer has been defined in the Concise Oxford dictionary as a vehicle towed by another. In other words, a trailer cannot move by itself. It has to be pulled by another moving vehicle. It can be a motor car, a tractor or any other moving vehicle. Inasmuch as, all varieties of trailers are mentioned in entry 3, it follows that all trailers whether pulled by motor car or tractor would attract tax under entry 3 of the First Schedule to the TNGST Act. In this view of the matter we have no quarrel with the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is confirmed. The T.C. Revision (Case) is dismissed at the admission stage. And this Tribunal doth further order that this order on being produced be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal on 8th day of July, 1999. Petition dismissed.
........
|
