Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 1466 Records
-
1976 (11) TMI 185 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... depend on the fact as to whether a dealer has or has not charged any sales tax from its customers, or has charged a higher amount. Thus, if a sale is liable to be charged at a lower rate, the State cannot insist on realising a higher amount solely on the ground of a larger amount being charged. Relief can be given when an illegal impost not authorised by the law is made. This apart, as the petitioner has all along been challenging the rate of tax and has undertaken to refund the excess amount to its purchasers, we see no ground for not interfering with an illegal order imposing a tax not authorised under the law. We, accordingly, allow this petition in part and direct the Sales Tax Officer to reframe the assessment as indicated above, after deciding the question as to whether properzi redraw rods come within the description of metals and alloys in the light of the observation made above and in accordance with the law. Parties to bear their own costs. Petition partly allowed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 184 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... be anything else. As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court in District Controller of Stores, Northern Railway, Jodhpur v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer 1976 37 S.T.C. 423 (S.C.). , dealt with a case of sale of unserviceable materials and scrap iron by the railway and held that having regard to the definition of the term business found in the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, which was similar to the definition referred to already, found in the Tamil Nadu Act, the turnover was liable to tax. Consequently, we hold that even the turnover relating to the sale of print waste and cut waste will be liable to tax since the same cannot be said to be not ancillary or incidental to the business of printing, publishing and selling newspaper. Therefore, we allow this tax revision petition and set aside the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the two sums referred to above totalling a turnover of Rs. 6,24,373.30. There will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 183 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... e such further evidence as it considered fit to determine the legality or propriety of the order of the Assessing Authority. It was expressly pointed out that the bogus signature or the falsity of the deductions or exemptions allowed could also be gone into. In the present case, the revising authority found from the record, which was before the Assessing Authority, that certain transactions appeared to be bogus. On the basis of what was found in the record, the revising authority made further enquiry which he was competent to do. It was not a case where the revising authority initiated the proceeding for revision on the basis of any fresh information received by him which was not already part of the record. The proceeding for revision was initiated on the basis of suspicious features found in the record itself. The revising authority was, therefore, perfectly competent to issue the impugned notice. The writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed with costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 182 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... strike this new path we shall be right in saying that the authority of the decision in Jullundur case(1) remains unshaken. In Raj Kishan Goyal v. Sales Tax Officer1975 Current Tax Reporter (Delhi) 272., Rangarajan, J, held that under the unamended Act there was no provision for assessing a dissolved firm. Rule 39(1A) was relied upon before him as before me. Rejecting the contention of the revenue, he said Sub-rule (1A) does not, however, enable the assessment of a dissolved firm. And Rule 39(1 A) does not constitute or set up any machinery for assessing a dissolved firm. I have reached the same conclusion though by a different route. For these reasons, I would accept the writ petition and quash the proceedings initiated against the dissolved firm of G.L. Amarnath and Company and also quash the assessment orders for the assessment years 1961-62, 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66. In the circumstances of the case I would leave the parties to bear their own costs. Petition allowed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 181 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... able for the purpose of tax . In this case, admittedly there was no composite price but there were two separate prices. The Board of Revenue might have been right if there had been a consolidated or single or composite price charged for the kerosene in packed condition, but so long as the kerosene and the tins were charged for separately, there being no composite price, the rate applicable to kerosene cannot be applied to the turnover referable to the tins also. We may also point out that Patel Volkart Private Limited v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P.(1), has taken the same view where the court stated that When different articles are transferred under a composite contract, the rate available for either of the two cannot be charged. The different items will have to be charged at the different rates. Consequently, we allow the appeal and set aside the order of the Board of Revenue and restore that of the appellate authority. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 180 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ... ... ... ..... or resale as well as for use in the manufacture and that so long as the registration certificate authorised the petitioner to import the goods for resale, it would not be found guilty of violation on the ground that it resold the splints themselves. We are of the opinion that this contention is misconceived. The contents of the registration certificate have to be read with the declaration contained in form C for the purpose of finding out whether there has been violation or not. In this case, as we have pointed out already, there is an admission that the splints were imported under form C for manufacturing matches in its own factory, but they were actually resold. Consequently, this will constitute a violation of section 8(3)(b) read with the undertaking or declaration in C form licence. The result is that section 10(d) and section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act are attracted and the levy of penalty was therefore proper. Hence the petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 179 - SUPREME COURT
Recovery of property with arrears of rent and mesne profits and damages for waste - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the present case the provisions in section 50-A, 52 and 73 of the 1964 Act as amended in 1969 were invoked by the appellant. The appellant is disentitled from doing so by reason of Chapter II of the 1964 Act not being applicable to the lease where the lessor is a Government Company. Further these sections came to effect on 1 January 1970. The sections are not retrospective but prospective in operation. The appellant is not entitled to attract these sections
-
1976 (11) TMI 178 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the forest department is liable to sales tax on the timber covered by the demise?
Held that:- Allow the appeal and remand the case for consideration of the quantum of tax that the State, in the forest department, was legally liable to pay as a dealer, to the sales tax department.
-
1976 (11) TMI 170 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the respondent is liable to pay interest on the amount due from him as sales tax?
Whether it was necessary for the sales tax authorities to issue a fresh notice of demand to the respondent after the tax assessed by the Sales Tax Officer was reduced on appeal and further reduced on revision?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. There is no dispute in the present case that the notice of assessment and demand was served upon the assessee-respondent. The respondent cannot, therefore, escape liability for payment of interest. And it is apparent from clause (b) of sub-section (9) that where as a result of appeal, revision or other proceedings the amount of the tax or other dues is reduced, it shall not be necessary for the assessing authority to serve upon the dealer a fresh notice.
-
1976 (11) TMI 161 - SUPREME COURT
Validity of items 7(a) and 7(b) of the Second Schedule to the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 challenged - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The attack on the validity of item 7(b) of the Second Schedule to the State Act is not well-founded as there appears to be no warrant for the proposition that preferential treatment has been shown to dressed hides and skins prepared from locally purchased raw hides and skins compared to the treatment accorded to imported hides and skins.
-
1976 (11) TMI 153 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Winding up - Power to apply to court to have questions determined or powers exercised ... ... ... ... ..... section 446(3) read with section 518(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956, containing a non obstante clause and an exclusive power to this court being conferred by the statute for getting the suit transferred and disposed of. In the result, I am making the following order The suit being Miscellaneous Case No. 136 of 1975 (Agra Electric Supply Co. Ltd. (In voluntary liquidation) v. Nagar Mahapalika, Agra) pending before the Civil Court, Agra, be transferred to this court under section 446(3) of the Companies Act, 1956, read with section 518(1)(b) thereof. The Registrar of this court be directed to intimate this order to the Registrar of the Civil Court, Agra, for sending the records of the said suit to this court forthwith. The Registrar of this court to act on a signed copy of the minute on the plaintiff s undertaking to complete and file this order. The suit to appear in the list after the records are sent to this court by the Civil Court, Agra, for direction, four weeks hence.
-
1976 (11) TMI 144 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up – Delivery of property to liquidator, Power of court to assess damages against delinquent directors, etc.
-
1976 (11) TMI 135 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the provisions of section 108 of the Companies Act, 1956, are mandatory in regard to transfer of shares?
Can a company having been served with notice of attachment of shares register transfer of shares in contravention of the order of attachment?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The provisions contained in section 108 of the Act are, for the reasons indicated earlier, mandatory. The High Court erred in holding that the provisions are directory. Shares which had not been attached but had been surrendered to the receiver appointed by the Collector of Bombay came from the possession of the receiver in the partnership suit. The receiver in the partnership suit took possession of the shares along with blank transfer forms in the year 1953. When the receiver held the scrips and the transfer forms it was not open to the persons in whose names the shares originally stood to exercise rights of ownership in respect, thereof or to transfer their ownership to anyone else.
-
1976 (11) TMI 127 - MAHARASHTRA HIGH COURT
Aerated waters - Whether containing blended flavouring concentrate - Interpretation of taxing statute - ‘Concentrate’ and ‘Essence’
-
1976 (11) TMI 122 - ITAT PATNA-A
... ... ... ... ..... Tribunal have all estimated the cost of construction at various figures, it cannot be positively held that the assessee intentionally or dishonestly set up a false claim. Nor there is any material to hold that the sum of Rs. 17,502 added by the Income-tax Officer to the income of the assessee, by rejecting its explanation, really represented its income so as to attract the penal provisions of s. 271(1)(c). In somewhat similar circumstances, the Kerala High Court held in CIT vs. Mohammed Kunhi(3) that the disparity in the estimates of cost of construction and the rejection of the assessee rsquo s explanation for lower cost of construction did not necessarily imply that the assessee rsquo s accounts were totally false so as to justify the levy of penalty on him under s. 271 (1)(c). In these circumstances, we conclude that this being a case of estimate, no penalty is leviable on the assessee. The impugned order is, accordingly, cancelled. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 121 - ITAT PATNA-A
... ... ... ... ..... not be brushed aside lightly. The identity of the creditors having been established and there being nothing to doubt the assertions made by them in their confirmatory letters, the initial burden lying upon the assessee stood discharged and the onus shifted to the department to prove the fictitious character of the cash credits. In this connection, a reference may be be made to the decision of the High Court of Patna in the case of Sarogi Credit Corporation vs. CIT(1). If, therefore, the Income Tax Officer after having come to know that both the creditors were income tax assessees, still entertained any doubt about the genuineness of the cash credits, he should have summoned and cross ndash exaimned them, but he failed to do so. In these circumstances, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has, in our opinion, rightly accepted the claim of the assessee and deleted the addition to Rs. 53,590. We, accordingly, confirm the impugned order. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 117 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ... ... ... ..... rt including that of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Motor and General Insurance co. Ltd. (3), upheld the assessee rsquo s contention. The Madras High Court in the later case of Madras Auto Service vs. ITO, Company Circle-II(1), Madras(4), had followed its earlier ruling in CIT vs. Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Ltd.(5) and held that the relief under s. 80M would be admissible on the gross dividend. In this face of the above ruling of the Madras High Court we are unable to follow the ruling of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Addl. CIT, Gujarat vs. Cloth Traders (P.) Ltd.(1) relied upon by the Revenue. For the reasons mentioned by the Madras bench lsquo A of the Tribunal in the aforesaid order passed for the asst. yr. 1970-71 in ITA. No. 2793/Mds/ 1972-73 dated 14th March, 1975 with which we are in agreement and following the above ruling of Madras High Court we upheld the order of the AAC. 6. The appeals of the Revenue fail and are dismissed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 116 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ... ... ... ..... h reference to s. 230A. In our opinion, these circumstances themselves would not determine the income of station the main factors that have to be considered would be those laid down by the Gujarat High Court, in its decision referred to supra, in considering the meaning of lsquo Body of Individuals rsquo . We have already applied the said tests and found them not satisfied in this case. 7. In view of the above discussions, we are of the view that the AAC rsquo s conclusion that the status should be that of lsquo Body of Individuals rsquo is not correct. On the other hand, each of the members should be assessed separately, in respect of the capital gains, if any, in their individual hands. We direct the ITO to do so. 8. With regard to the valuation of the property as on 1st Jan., 1954 we are of the view that the AAC rsquo s adoption of the value at Rs. 50,000 does not call for any interference and we confirm the same accordingly. 9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 115 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ... ... ... ..... tment established that he had acted in deliberate disregard of his statutory obligations. Apart from the explanation offered by the assessee for the non-filing of the returns within time, we do not find any material on record to show that the assessee was guilty of conduct contumacious of dishonest or of acting in deliberate disregard of the provisions of the law. If really the assessee was aware of the wealth-tax liability, it would have certainly filed the returns of wealth in time and thereby avoided exposing itself to a huge and perversive penalty of Rs. 4,66,485 as against the total tax of only Rs. 43,819. 6. Having carefully considered the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the considered opinion that the assessee is not guilty of having filed its wealth-tax returns late without reasonable cause. We have, therefore, no hesitation in upholding the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appeals of the Revenue fail and are dismissed.
-
1976 (11) TMI 114 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ... ... ... ..... inted out earlier are entirely different. On the basis of the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT West Bengal vs. Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd., (8) referred to in para 5 supra in this case there is nothing to show that if a member is deprived of the benefit of export service, in other words, there is no element of compulsion imposed on the members to contribute to the various funds. 6. On a careful consideration of the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case we hold that the Income-tax authorities are not justified in adding back the receipts and contributions from members of the assessee-association received and credited to building improvement fund, general welfare fund, Jawans rsquo welfare fund etc., for all the years under appeal. We, therefore, delete the items added back by the Income-tax Officer by applying s.2, sub-s. (24) clause (v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with s.28 (iii) of the Act. The appeals are allowed.
............
|