|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 382 Records
-
1998 (1) TMI 456 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... e Companies Act in consonance with the settled principles of law. The claim of the petitioner does not prima facie appear to be barred under any law nor does there appear to be any other reason on record to decline the permission to the petitioner-company as prayed for. The endavour of the company court would normally be to have the affairs of the company and more particularly the case by or against the company decided expeditiously and save unnecessary expenses. For the reason aforestated, this petition is allowed. The petiitioner-bank is granted leave under section 446(1) and (2) of the Companies Act to institute and pursue its claim petition before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur. However, leave granted by this order is subject to the condition that execution proceedings in furtherance of the recovery certificate issued by the Tribunal would not be executed against the assets and properties of the company without leave of this court. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1998 (1) TMI 454 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Winding up-Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... en into consideration, than it would be quite clear that initially both the parties wanted to have the dispute settled with negotiation across the table, but as the same could not be worked out by them, they have taken recource to law by the petitioner issuing the notice under section 434 and, the respondent filing the suit for damages in the City Civil Court. In my opinion, merely because the said suit is filed after the service of the notice, it could not be said to be false or vexatious suit and the claim raised by the respondent and the claim of the petitioner is not honest and bona fide one. 7. Therefore, in view of the above consideration, I am of the opinion that there is no admitted debt between the parties and, there is reasonable bona fide dispute regarding the debt in question. Consequently, the present winding up petition under section 433 will have to be rejected and I accordingly reject the same. But in the circumstances, no order as to costs. SCL q MAY 20, 1999
-
1998 (1) TMI 433 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the purchases of the closing stock of goods as on 31st March, held by agents outside the State, could be brought to tax as having attained the quality of last purchase before that date under Explanation to section 2(xxvi) and section 8(b) of the Act?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. As no doubt in our mind that, by the amendment in the Explanation, the Legislature has altered the legal position prior to amendment that purchases of closing stock or goods on 31st March, held by agents outside the State, would not be brought to tax having not attained the quality of last purchase before that date. Therefore no merit in the contentions of learned counsel for the appellant.
-
1998 (1) TMI 432 - SUPREME COURT
Whether penalty imposed under section 43 must be regarded as a fresh assessment and therefore, a penalty under section 43 can be imposed only within the period prescribed by section 18(8) of the said Act for the purposes of assessment?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. We find it difficult to accept the argument, for the power under section 43 can be invoked only in proceedings in appeal from an assessment order or otherwise in proceedings under the said Act. Necessarily, therefore, the imposition of the penalty is a part of such proceedings and cannot be regarded as a fresh assessment. In these circumstances, the limitations of time prescribed under section 18(8) for assessments would not apply to the imposition of penalty under section 43.
-
1998 (1) TMI 420 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Valuation - Job work - Margin of profit ... ... ... ... ..... cturing profit. The Departmental Representative contends that manufacturing profit is different from the profit accrued to the manufacturer (job worker) represents the addition to the value of the profit as a result of the activity of the job worker. 3. emsp It is true that, in the clarificatory order, the Supreme Court had mentioned four items which can together constitute the value for assessment of goods at the hands of the job worker - the value of raw material, value of the job work manufacturing profit and manufacturing expenses. However, the notice proceeded on the footing that what was to be added was the profit of the job worker. Therefore, any finding that what was to be included any element other than these would be beyond the scope of the notice, and therefore impermissible. Since the manufacturers rsquo profit margin has already been found to be included in the assessable value, it could not be added again. We, therefore decline to interfere. 5. Appeal dismissed.
-
1998 (1) TMI 419 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Waste, parings and scrap of P.U. Foam - Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... in the said Notification has not been satisfied. We are unable to accept this reasoning of the original authority inasmuch as the dispute is not regarding the dutiability of the foamed blocked which comes into existence by use of material on which Modvat credit has been taken but the dispute is regarding the rdquo top skin, bottom skin and side skins rdquo of the foamed blocked inasmuch as those skins are hard, un-foamed and partly foamed portion cut from P.U. Foamed Blocked and those P.U. Foamed Blocks have been cleared without payment of duty under Notification 217/87-C.E. Therefore, P.U. foamed blocks will be considered to have paid the duty liability at nil rate of duty. 3. emsp Relying on the Tribunal rsquo s judgment in the case of Maruthi Foam (supra), we allow the benefit to the appellants herein on the applicability of Notification 53/88-C.E., dated 1-3-88. Consequently, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1998 (1) TMI 406 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Winding up-Application of insolvency rules in winding up of insolvent Companies ... ... ... ... ..... rther, if no one offers to purchase the assets of the company exceeding the minimum bid amount, referred to above, the assets of the company, which are already sold to the second respondents shall be confirmed in favour of the second respondent at Rs. 2,80,00,000 (rupees 2 crorers and eighty lakhs) only. The process of sale shall be completed within two months from today, after fully complying with the procedure prescribed. It is also necessary to place on record the submission made by Sri Mallya on behalf of the third respondent, Sri Raj Kotak, that he will bear the expenses for conducting fresh sale, to be incurred by the official liquidator and the Corporation. The said statement made by Sri Mallya is made binding on the third respondent. The official liquidator shall secure appropriate directions from this court for sale of the assets of the company immediately. 22. Subject to the observations made above, the application is rejected. However, no order is made as to costs.
-
1998 (1) TMI 405 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the interim dividend declared by the board of directors in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1951 -52 was to be taxed in that year or was the interim dividend liable to be taxed in the assessment year 1952-53 because the payment was made in that previous year?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The nature of the interim dividend is such that it gives no right to the shareholders to receive it merely on the passing of the resolution by the board of directors whereas on a dividend being declared by the company in general meeting a vested right accrues to the shareholders. This being so, if the company in general meeting had declared a dividend on 6-12-1962 and the same was distributed in January 1963, then the aforesaid Explanation 3 would have been applicable. But in the present case, the decision of the board of directors on 6-12-1962 to pay interim dividend cannot be construed as meaning declaration of dividend by the company. This being so what would be relevant is the distribution of the dividend in January 1963, thereby attracting the provisions of clause (i)( c) of the second proviso and the income-tax authorities were, therefore, right in reducing the rebate in the manner in which they did for the assessment year 1964-65.
-
1998 (1) TMI 404 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up - Inability to pay ... ... ... ... ..... ompany, is based upon the correspondence exchanged between the two companies. The observa-tions of the Court with regard to the lack of bona fide in the defence put forward by the respondent-company are further substantiated from the very fact that nobody has come to oppose this petition nor there has been any reasonable offer on the part of the said company. 7. In these circumstances, the Court has no option but to hold that the respondent-company has failed to pay its debts lawfully recoverable. Consequently, the respondent-company Himanshu Proteins Ltd. Dabwali Road, Sirsa, is ordered to be wound up in accordance with law. The Official Liquidator attached to this Court is directed to take charge of the assets and affairs of the Company forthwith. 8. Notice shall be published in the Indian Express and Jan Satta (Hindi) with regard to winding up of this Company. The formal order be drawn in accordance with law. However, there shall be no order as to costs. SCL q MAY 20, 1998
-
1998 (1) TMI 403 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Court - Jurisdiction of ... ... ... ... ..... nor proper. In the face of the provisions of section 10 no amount of acquiescence can be permitted in loss of jurisdiction of specified court and creation of jurisdiction in a Court which under law does not have the jurisdiction. Such meddlesome interpretation is bound to offend the statutory provisions, their objects and Legislative intent behind such an enactment. 17. In view of the above detailed discussion, I have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present winding up petition as the registered office of the respondent-company is situated at Mumbai. This petition is, therefore, rejected with the direction that Registry could return the original petition to the petitioner for presentation before a court of competent jurisdiction. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. 18. Company petition as well as C.A. are accordingly disposed off. SCL q APRIL 20, 1999
-
1998 (1) TMI 402 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... the amount is lawfully due to the petitioner and the respondent-company in spite of notice has intentionally failed to pay its liability. The company is unable to pay the debts due from the company. For the reasons aforestated, this petition needs to be allowed. Consequently, this petition is allowed with costs which are assessed at Rs.2,000. The respondent-company, Organic Chem Oils Ltd., is ordered to be wound up, under section 433(e) read with section 434(1) and section 439 of the Companies Act. The official liquidator attached to this court is hereby appointed official liquidator of the respondent-company. He is directed to take charge and possession of the assets, properties and records of the company forthwith. The official liquidator is directed to publish notice of the order of winding up of the company in two newspapers, whichever have wide circulation in the area under the jurisdiction of this court, in accordance with rules. The petition is accordingly disposed of.
-
1998 (1) TMI 401 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Winding-up - Inability to pay debts ... ... ... ... ..... rative office was wrongly stated to be that of registered office. In rejoinder the petitioner-company has explained and corrected this mistake by giving correct address of its registered office as Plot No. 241 -242 (b), Road No. 6-D, V.K.I., Area, Jaipur . 15. The petition is, therefore, admitted. The petitioner shall take necessary steps to advertise the petition for hearing on 26-2-1998 in prescribed form in one issue of English newspaper Times of India (New Delhi Edition) and one issue of Denik Bhaskar Jaipur Edition. On the facts and circum-stances, I also think it just and proper to appoint Official Liquidator attached to this Court as provisional liquidator of the respondent-com- pany. He shall take into his custody and control all the properties, effects and actionable claims to which the company is or appears to be entitled. He shall also take in his possession or control all books of account and other documents of the company in accordance with law. SCL q MAY 5, 1998
-
1998 (1) TMI 399 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Winding up - Suit stayed on ... ... ... ... ..... very proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Delhi. The leave shall be subject to following conditions (1)The applicant will undertake to discharge the liability due to the workmen if any, under section 529A of the Act to the extent of the amount realised from the assets of the company. (2)The applicant-bank will intimate the Official Liquidator from time to time about the progress of the recovery proceedings and the inter-locutory applications, if any, seeking any order in relation to the secured properties. (3)The final result of the proceedings shall be intimated immediately to the Official Liquidator. (4)The execution proceeding for realisation of the amount from the properties of the company shall be taken by the bank after obtaining permission from the Company Court. (5)The expenses to be incurred by the Official Liquidator in defending before the Tribunal shall be recoverable from sale proceeds of the properties of the company as and when sold. SCL q MAY 5, 1998
-
1998 (1) TMI 398 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the Special Court, functioning under the provisions of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 has jurisdiction to entertain and try the criminal case filed by the respondent-complainant against the appellant-accused?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The learned single judge of the High Court, as a Special Court, was quite justified in passing the impugned order in connection with the jurisdiction of that court in entertaining and trying the criminal case against the appellant. A conjoint reading of the recitals in the complaint which obviously must be assumed to be true at this stage would show that the accused is alleged to have entered into a transaction in securities, namely, the shares during the relevant period and out of the said transaction is alleged to have received sale proceeds which he has not handed over or transmitted to the complainant who claims to be entitled to the said amount. Thus the offence alleged is certainly relating to the transaction in securities as is said to have been entered into by the accused during the relevant period.
-
1998 (1) TMI 397 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Bar of jurisdiction, Director - Disclosure of interest , Articles of association ... ... ... ... ..... or a device to achieve a result with some ulterior motive has been practised by the defendants of the plaintiff. I am of the considered view that BIFR will be the right forum where the industrial sickness of the defendant company is to be determined, I decline to grant injunction as prayed for by the plaintiff. Even the balance of convenience is also in not granting the injunction. The defendant has got a statutory right to file a reference under section 15. Defendant has already filed a reference on 6-11 -1997 before BIFR under section 15. It is for BIFR to determine under section 16 the factum of industrial sickness of the defendant company. Nothing said earlier would be an expression of opinion on the merits of this case. For the reasons stated above I dismiss the application of the plaintiff with no orders as to costs. Suit No. 2332 of 1997 Suit is adjourned sine die with liberty to the parties to move this Court for revival of the suit, if so advised. SCL q JULY 5, 1998
-
1998 (1) TMI 396 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Winding up of company - Inability to pay debts ... ... ... ... ..... or the last over ten years and the two directors who had also been impleaded as respondents are dead. Under the circum-stances, it will be of no use to keep this company alive and to continue it to remain recorded before the Registrar of Companies. 6. As a result, this petition is allowed. The company Metalfabs India (P.) Ltd. having its registered office at Barnawa Road, near City Railway Station, Meerut, shall be wound up. The official liquidator, High Court is appointed the Liquidator for the said purpose and shall take necessary action in the matter. The Registry is directed to comply with rule 109 of the Companies (Court) Rules. The petitioner shall advertise the order in accordance with rule 113 of the Companies (Court) Rules in two newspapers, one published in English and the other in Hindi and also get the same published in the State Official Gazette. I further direct that a copy of the order be filed with the Registrar of Companies within one month. SCL q MAY 5, 1998
-
1998 (1) TMI 393 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Debt Recovery Tribunal - Powers of ... ... ... ... ..... rn of injury it may become irreparable and one may not withstand the onslaught of such types of draconic rigorous orders without any notice. At the point of threshold of the commencement of the proceeding no party can be presumed to have a full proof case for which a party to a litigation can make a walk-over just on mere asking. The tenor of the order tends to militate against basic norms of judicial tenets which are required to be confirmed when non-conformity is likely to result any such drastic repercussions. This Court need not go into repetition of its opinion as expressed earlier in extenso but after having formed such an opinion it has no hesitation to strike down the orders impugned and they are liable to be set aside. As such all the abovenoted revisional applications succeed and the impugned orders therein are set aside. The said order will guide and govern all the five applications referred to above. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. SCL q MAY, 5 1998
-
1998 (1) TMI 370 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Rigid Polyurethene Foam neither marketed nor capable of being marketed is not excisable ... ... ... ... ..... Supreme Court thereunder has dismissed the appeal filed by the Collector against Final Order No. 684/89-C, dated 21-11-89 passed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Eagle Flask Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Pune. Further, it was submitted by the respondents rsquo counsel that issue with reference to the marketability has not been considered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s. U. Foam Ltd. referred to above by the Departmental Representative. 7. emsp On a careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides and taking into consideration that the Tribunal has been consistently taking the view that item in question is not excisable since item was neither marketed nor capable of being marketed and the view was upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Eagle Flask Pvt. Ltd. (supra), following the ratio of the decisions, we accept the contention of the respondents. In the result, the appeals filed by the department are hereby dismissed.
-
1998 (1) TMI 362 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
Classifiaction ... ... ... ... ..... 596 of R.K. JAIN rsquo s Central Excise of India - 1988-89 edition in granting benefit of classification to the respondents herein under heading 70.14. 2. emsp We have heard the ld. JDR Shri Rama Rao. 3. emsp We observe from the grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue in support of its appeal that this finding of the lower appellate authority has not been assailed at all in the appeal. 4. emsp Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the Revenue rsquo s appeal. Consequently, we dismiss the same.
-
1998 (1) TMI 353 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... stt. Collector of Central Excise v. Bata India Ltd., reported in 1996 (84) E.L.T. 164 (S.C.) and 1996 (84) E.L.T. 173 (S.C.) in the case of Modi Rubber Ltd. v. Union of India, respectively. 3. emsp We have carefully considered the matter. We find that the issue involved in this case has been squarely covered by the aforesaid decision as it was rightly pointed out by Shri M. Ali in both the cases. It was clearly held that effective duty of excise i.e. the amount actually payable as excise duty on goods in question after taking into account the exemption notification, if any, alone excludible and not the duty at the rate prescribed in the Schedule. Accordingly whatever concession got in terms of the notification is to be added. Since the issue has already been considered and covered by the Supreme Court decision following the precedent, we accept the contention of the Revenue and accordingly we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. In the result, appeal is dismissed.
........
|
