|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 3458 Records
-
1991 (12) TMI 274 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... l of the case alone will bring out the truth. Thus, on a consideration of circumstances appearing for and against, we are of the opinion that quashing of the charges and/or criminal proceedings at this stage would not be just and proper. The proper order to make in this case is to request the Delhi High Court to dispose of Criminal Revision No. 191 of 1986 as early as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of copy of this order is communicated to it. After the Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of, the trial Judge will take up the matter and proceed with it with as much expedition as possible in the circumstances and preferably on a day-to-day basis. 57. Writ Petition No. 833 of 1990 and Writ Petition No. 268 of 1987 are accordingly dismissed with the directions aforementioned. Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1987 preferred by State of Bihar against the judgment of the Full Bench of the Patna High Court is also dismissed for the reasons hereinbefore.
-
1991 (12) TMI 273 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t and had given cogent reasons for disbelieving this part of the prosecution case, yet the High Court merely refers to the evidence of the handwriting expert without examining the veracity of the prosecution evidence to conclude if the trial court had not correctly appreciated their evidence, not realising that the evidence of the expert was not decisive unless the prosecution version inspired confidence. By relying on the opinion of the handwriting expert, the High Court concluded that it lent corroboration to the confession, thus treating the confession as the base document around which the rest of the evidence must circle. We on a critical examination of the prosecution evidence in this behalf, find this part of the prosecution case highly artificial and unconvincing. 8. We accordingly allow the appeals, set aside the conviction and sentence and acquit the appellants on all the charges giving the benefit of doubt. We direct that the appellants be set at liberty forthwith.
-
1991 (12) TMI 272 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... romised to place the services of a mining engineer/expert at the disposal of the arbitrator to assist him on the technical aspects of the matter. The name of the nominee should be communicated to the arbitrator within four weeks from today. It will be open to the arbitrator to avail himself of the services of such nominee. Parties may settle the terms of arbitration with the arbitrator. The company and Union of India should, however, deposit ₹ 10,000 each with the arbitrator as soon as the terms are settled to enable him to start the proceedings without delay. The Arbitrator may enter upon the reference within four weeks of the date of communication of this order to him. He may make his award within a period of four months thereafter. He will not be obliged to give reasons for his conclusions. A copy of this order may be sent to the learned Arbitrator by the Registry. The writ petitions disposed of in the above terms. In the circumstances, we make no order as to costs.
-
1991 (12) TMI 271 - SUPREME COURT
Scope of Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Held that:- Letting under Section 21 is not hedged with any restriction. Throwing the whole or part of the premises by landlord for letting out is not linked with his existing accommodation, its number or sufficiency. The one is not dependent on the other. Even letting for paying instalment of loan, for constructing the premises or its re-letting has not been held to be contrary to Section 21. Validity of permission has to be judged on the date of grant of application. Availability of premises for indefinite letting cannot be judged by subsequent events or the failure of the landlord to occupy immediately for personal, financial, economic or other reasons. Therefore, the authorities committed manifest of error of law, both in entertaining the application of the tenant resisting the objection of the landlady by placing the burden on her erroneously and deciding against her by misapplication of law and misconstructions of the provisions of Section 21.
Sri Rajeev Dhavan rightly urged that both the Controller and the Tribunal misdirected themselves in placing the burden on the landlady to prove that the permission obtained by her was genuine. According to him the primary burden was on the tenant to establish that the permission was obtained by playing fraud. Unfortunately, it appears, the authorities assumed fraud and misrepresentation on mere averment in the objection of the tenant and proceeded to record the finding on premise that the landlady was required to prove it. Apart from the procedural error even the finding that the premises were not needed by her after three years is not well founded. Appeal allowed
-
1991 (12) TMI 270 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... have connection with jewellers and that alone will not be sufficient to form a reasonable belief, in order to seize the ornaments. The seizure of the blank form from the house of the proprietor of Alankar Jewellers and two keys from the shop premises at best may raise a suspicion but that will not be enough to form a reasonable belief as required by Section 66 of the Act. The petitioners, therefore, have made out a case for interference by this Court under writ jurisdiction. It will be, however, open to the authorities to take any other action which may he permissible under the law uninfluenced by the observations made by us which has been made for a limited purpose relating to the powers of search and seizure. The Department will be at liberty to form its own opinion on the materials placed before them in accordance with law. The application is allowed and the respondents are directed to return back the ornaments to the petitioners forthwith. Parties to bear their own cost.
-
1991 (12) TMI 269 - SUPREME COURT
Whether there was an unreasonable delay in executing the order of detention from the date of passing of the detention order throwing considerable doubt on the genuineness of the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority as regards the necessity to detain the petitioner/
Held that:- In the present case, the circumstances indicate that the detaining authority after passing the detention order was indifferent in securing the detenu by not taking proper action with greater promptitude. The police officials have treated the warrant of arrest in a very casual manner and unduly delayed its execution. In particular, the Inspector of Police to whom the warrant was forwarded for execution, as pointed out ibid, was indolent inspite of the repeated reminders and was giving evasive answers till the detenu was secured in his native place itself. This recalcitrant and refractory conduct of the Inspector has allowed the detenu to remain at large for such a long period and has consequently defeated the very purpose of the impugned order.
For all the aforementioned reasons, we set aside the impugned order of detention and direct the detenu to be set at liberty forthwith.
-
1991 (12) TMI 268 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the Award was vitiated as it contained no reasons?
Whether the Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to award pendente lite interest?
Held that:- Where the agreement between the parties does not prohibit grant of interest and where a party claims interest and that dispute (alongwith the claim for principal amount or independently) is referred to the arbitrator, he shall have the power to award interest pendente lite. This is for the reason that in such a case it must be presumed that interest was an implied term of the agreement between the parties and therefore when the parties refer all their disputes-or refer the dispute as to interest as such-to the arbitrator, he shall have the power to award interest. This does not mean that in every case the arbitrator should necessarily award interest pendente lite. It is a matter within his discretion to be exercised in the light of all the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping the ends of justice in view.
Thus the Arbitrator acted with jurisdiction in awarding pendente lite interest and the High Court rightly upheld the award. In the result both the appeals fail and are, accordingly, dismissed
-
1991 (12) TMI 267 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... will be fitted as part of the machinery or are used for transmission of electric power. The Gujarat High Court in State of Gujarat v. Minu Chemical Pvt. Ltd. reported in 1982 50 STC 339 has considered principle of the parts of machinery when they are assembled will be able to form a complete machinery, as machinery . In Ambica Wood Works v. State of Gujarat reported in 1979 43 STC 338 the definition of machinery was considered in a wider sense and the cables fitted with steam pipes, etc., were considered as machinery . 5. In the present case, there is no finding that the cables sold by the assessee are part of the machinery or will form a machinery when assembled. In this view of the matter, the decision of the Sales Tax Tribunal cannot be upheld and the order of the Tribunal is quashed. The matter is sent back to the Tribunal for giving a finding regarding the use of the cables and then decide the matter in accordance with the principles enunciated above. Petition allowed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 266 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT]
... ...
... ... ..... d tax had been paid on a sale or purchase of calcined petroleum coke under the Central Act. 12.. In the result, the petition is allowed to the extent indicated above, and the impugned communication refusing to refund tax paid in respect of raw petroleum coke (annexure IX series to the petition) is quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed that, if the court passes an order for refund of the tax paid on a sale or purchase of raw petroleum coke under the Assam Act, the same may be adjusted towards any sales tax payable by the petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and pendency of the case for more than 4 years, it is directed that the refund shall first of all be adjusted towards the tax payable by the petitioners, and, thereafter, the balance, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioners within a period of six months from today. 13.. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is disposed of. No costs. Petition allowed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 265 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... those items from taxation net, which were held not liable to be taxed by the appellate authority. In the appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal against the provisional order if it is found that the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was correct then no problem arises but if the Sales Tax Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) is not in accordance with law then final order has to be modified by the assessing authority under rule 37 read with section 10 or section 12, as the case may be. It will not be proper to hold that the appeal pending before the Sales Tax Tribunal has become infructuous and, therefore, I am of the view that the decision of the Tribunal on this point is not based on the correct interpretation of the provisions of section 13 and the scheme of the Act. The revision is allowed and the Tribunal is directed to decide the appeal on merit, after due notice to the parties. No order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 264 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cted and thereafter the directions were given by this Court under section 15(3A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act to refer the above question of law. Now in view of the amendment in the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act the said application is treated as revision application and is disposed of accordingly. There is no dispute that the commodity sold was a thread and it was made of cotton. The cotton thread which is having the primary use as a sewing thread if it is used for flying the kites will not make a change in the basic character of the commodity on account of its use. The taxation of a commodity is based mainly on its primary and general use. If a commodity is capable of being used for some other purpose then because of the use in such other purpose, there cannot be any difference in the rate of tax. There does not appear to be any justification for interfering with the order of the Board of Revenue. The revision application is dismissed. No order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 263 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... h September, 1982 and the order of the Additional Commissioner dated 6th June, 1983, are, therefore, set aside with the direction on the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Asansol Circle, to consider afresh the application of the dealer for eligibility certificate with effect from 9th September, 1981 and dispose of it in the light of this judgment and in accordance with law, within a period of two months from this order. 11.. Interim orders issued by the High Court and extended by this Tribunal on 12th May, 1989 are hereby vacated. Tax authorities are at liberty to take up assessment for the period from 2nd December, 1979 to 8th September, 1981. The assessments for the period from 9th September 1981 to 11th February, 1986 shall remain stayed pending disposal of the application for grant or renewal of eligibility certificate. 12.. In the premises, the application succeeds and is allowed on contest without costs. L.N. RAY (Judicial Member).-I agree. Application allowed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 262 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the word regulation would encompass the power to fix rates of admission and classification of the seats?
Held that:- The fixation of the prices of cinema tickets is integral to and a necessary adjunct of the larger power to 'regulate' and 'licence' the cinematograph trade. At best, such a power is a reasonable restriction in the interest of the general public to carry on such a business. That being so, we are unable to appreciate the contention that merely because the Act and the Rules thereunder cloths the licensing authority with power to fix prices which had been exercised by imposing condition No. 4, then the same would become necessarily unconstitutional.
Thus Section 5, read with Rule 4 and condition 4A of the licence is a regulatory measure to fix the rates of admission and classification of the seating in the interest of the general public. It is within the power of the licensing authority. They do not impinge upon the fundamental right to trade, avocation or business of the licensee under the Act. It is a reasonable restriction imposed in the public interest. Appeal dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 261 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ns 14 and 15 of the Central Act. However, since we take the view that lignite is a different and separate commodity other than coal, it is not necessary to refer to these decisions in detail. In our view, there is no question of two possible views. We are of the opinion that only one view is possible and that lignite is a different commodity and it is not coal. Therefore, the reliance placed by Mr. Pathak on the decision of this Court in the case of Arvind Boards Paper Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 1982 137 ITR 635 is also of no help to the petitioners. 25.. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that lignite cannot be considered to be coal. Since this question is decided against the petitioner, all other contentions raised in support of this contention also fail. 26.. No other substantial contention is raised. 27. In the result, all the petitions fail and they are ordered to be rejected. Rule discharged with no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 260 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cash assistance . Learned counsel for the petitioner produced a typical contract entered into by the assessee in these cases wherein the term relating to price was similar and provided as follows The unit ex-factory price freight to destination railway station/stores and transit insurance and f.o.r. destination railway station/stores are indicated below. Sales tax, if any, and applicable will be paid extra at actuals. As the excise duty is reimbursable by Government of India, it shall not be paid by the Board and the contractor should claim the same directly from the Government. Therefore, in these cases also it has to be held that excise duty did not form part of the taxable turnover as it was not payable by the customer Board and that the Tribunal erred in including it in the taxable turnover. In the circumstances, following the earlier decision of this Court in the case of State of A.P. v. Ranka Cables Pvt. Ltd. 1990 78 STC 111, we have to allow these tax revision cases.
-
1991 (12) TMI 259 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n sub-section (8). (4) In addition to the tax assessed or fee levied under this sub-section, the assessing authority may also direct the dealer to pay a penalty as specified in sub-section (8). Under these provisions also it is when making the relevant assessments that the assessing authority may also direct the dealer to pay penalty in addition to the tax assessed. In the present case it was not stated under what sub-section of section 14 the penalty was imposed. However, whether the penalty sought to be imposed was under sub-section (2) or under sub-section (3) or under sub-section (4) of section 14, the result is the same. In view of the fact that the penalty was sought to be imposed on March 31, 1986, long after the assessment was made and not at the time when the assessment was made by order dated March 14, 1983, it was clearly unauthorised. We see no error in the order of the Appellate Tribunal. The tax revision case is therefore dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 258 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... SC). A similar provision for purchase tax in section 3-AAAA of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, as amended in 1979, was also declared invalid by a Division Bench of Allahabad High Court in Pioneer Tanneries and Glue Works v. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 1991 83 STC 1 (All.). 43.. I agree with the honourable Chairman that the purchase taxes paid or payable for the period from October 10, 1977 to September 10, 1990, under the impugned provisions of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, and the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954, which were declared invalid by the judgment dated September 11, 1990, should not be refunded to the present applicants on the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The same should, however, be refunded to the extent paid or realised for the period from September 11, 1990 only. Therefore, the present applications succeed in part with the directions and observations contained in the judgment delivered by the honourable Chairman. Applications partly allowed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 257 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rges collected from the contractors were not exigible to tax. In the present case, however, the cylinders did not continue to be in the possession of the petitioner herein possession of the cylinders was delivered to the customers. These facts satisfy the requirement of section 5-E. As already held by us, on the facts of this case, we are satisfied that the charges collected by the petitioner were charges for the use of the cylinders by its customers who were given full possession of the cylinders. There was transfer of the right to use the cylinders as containers of the gases purchased by the customers. Therefore all the requirements of section 5-E are satisfied in the present case and the hire charges were validly subjected to tax. We also notice that out of a total turnover of Rs. 1.09 crores, the rental charges are Rs. 5.27 lakhs which is a substantial amount. In the circumstances, we find no merit in this tax revision case. It is therefore dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 256 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e co-operative movement in producing milk. The concession shown to them is certainly in public interest. It is to control the price of milk as well. 12.. But for S.R.O. 504/89, petitioners who are dealers in cattle-feed and poultry feed are to include the turnover in their returns. The concession given by that notification was withdrawn by S.R.O. 131/90. Thereafter petitioners are not entitled to any concession in respect of the turnover relating to sale of cattle-feed and poultry feed. They should have included that turnover in the returns filed by them. Petitioners did not include it in the returns filed. So they subjected themselves to proceedings under section 45A of the Act. Viewed in this manner I do not find any reason to interfere with the steps taken by the authorities under section 45A of the Act either. In the result petitioners are not entitled to any of the reliefs asked for. Original petitions fail. They are accordingly dismissed. No costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 255 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... that there is undervaluation of the goods in the delivery note or in the documents accompanying the goods. We do not want to catalogue all cases in which the officers will have reason to believe that in transporting the goods, there is an attempt to evade payment of tax. But we would like to draw the attention of the officers that there is a kindred provision in the Act, section 19B, which enables the assessing authority to assess the dealer to the best of his judgment, after making necessary enquiries, and value the goods at the prevailing market rate, in cases where in the opinion, the goods have been valued in the accounts at prices lower than the prevailing market rate. The exact scope and import of section 19B of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act has been laid down in a Bench decision of this Court in Devassy v. State of Kerala 1991 81 STC 2. We would only remind the officers of the department to inform themselves about the content of the said decision. Petition allowed.
........
|
