|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 401 Records
-
1996 (10) TMI 430 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Court - Jurisdiction of ... ... ... ... ..... at the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, do not envisage any such petition and what petition lie, are specified. Petitions provided under the Rules are exhaustive. I am unable to agree with this submission as well. As already stated, when sub-section (4) of section 209 of the Act envisages conferment of right of inspection on the director, then the director can seek a remedy by moving a petition to this court. Thus, I hold that the petition is maintainable under section 209(4) of the Act and the company is under an obligation to allow inspection to the petitioner of all the books of account and other books and papers. (p. 808) 12. We are unable to concur with the view taken as a whole. There may be other remedies available to enforce the right, but the remedy is not available in the High Court since the Companies Act does not stipulate as such. 13. In the result, the appeal has no merit and is dismissed with costs. The order of stay granted in this appeal on 9-9-1996 is vacated.
-
1996 (10) TMI 428 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
SSI Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... g authority and has not been contradicted or shown to be wrong. Therefore, evidently they have fulfilled the conditions mentioned in Notfn. No. 174/89, dated 1-9-89. 13. emsp The reference to the previous financial years is for the limited purpose of allowing the factual position to be taken into account for determining the eligibility to the benefit of this notification. Therefore while the notification comes in force w.e.f. 1-9-89 (and in that sense it is not retrospective in character), however, for the purposes of ascertaining the eligibility or otherwise to the notification 175/86 it allows the position obtaining in 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89 as indicated above to be taken into account And we find that the stipulated conditions have been satisfied. Therefore, after 1990 when the show cause notice was issued they had already become re-entitled to the benefit of Notfn. No. 175/86. Hence, the confirmation of the demand was not called for. The appeal is therefore accepted.
-
1996 (10) TMI 421 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the High Court should have held that the amount of excise duty paid by the assessee/purchaser directly to the Central Excise Department on petroleum products owned by the assessee at the stage of removal from the bonded warehouses ought to have been treated as part of the taxable turnover of the purchaser within the meaning of section 5-A of the Act?
Whether the High Court ought to have held that shell hexane and special boiling point spirit were liable to tax at the rate applicable to the detergents and therefore under entry 57B of the First Schedule to the Act?
Held that:- Appeals allowed and petitions dismissed.
-
1996 (10) TMI 416 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Compromise and arrangement, Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... t case that the scheme is obviously unfair or unfair to the meanest intelligence. There is no question of fraud or cheating or deception in the instant case. Accordingly, in my view, considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the order for approval of the sanction of the scheme should be passed. There will, accordingly, be an order in terms of prayers (a ) to (h) of the petition. The petitioners will pay costs assessed at 100 G. Ms. to the Central Government. The learned advocate appearing for Tamal Kumar Majumdar, the objector, has prayed for stay of operation of this order. In my view, there is no need for grant of stay in view of the fact that the sanction will only become effective upon filing of the certified copy of the order which will take some time. In that view of the matter, stay is not granted. All parties concerned including the official liquidator are to act on a signed copy of the operative portion of this judgment and order on the usual undertaking.
-
1996 (10) TMI 415 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Temporary protection of employee ... ... ... ... ..... ned, that if the office has, while scrutinising the plaint, not pointed out this fact, a court may very safely proceed on the footing that there is no such bar I do need to emphasise therefore, that before blaming the presiding officer of a court, it is more necessary to ascertain as to whether the litigants and their learned advocates have done their duty. In the present case, I do not propose to examine that aspect of the matter because, it is not very clear as to whether there were acknowledgments of the date at subsequent points of time which is quite possible end more so because, the petitioner is entitled to succeed on the first point. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner was no more than a mere employee of the company, he would not be liable for the financial transactions of the company in a civil court and on the state of the present record. The decree passed against him only is, therefore, set aside. The C. 8. P. succeeds to this extent No order as to costs.
-
1996 (10) TMI 401 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... 6. emsp We do not agree with the findings given by the Assistant Collector that tool kit is a part of the vehicle. Tool kit as such cannot be considered to be a part or component of vehicle cleared by the assessee. On going through the facts and circumstances and the records the Collector (Appeals) has given a finding that these tool kits were not supplied along with the vehicles. Since these are bought-out items and not manufactured by the assessee and further more these items cannot be considered to be ordinary parts of the vehicles, we concur with the arguments advanced on behalf of the assessee based upon the case law referred to above. Accordingly, we accept the contention of the assessees in all these cases and in the result the two appeals filed by the department are hereby dismissed and the appeal filed by the party in the case of Maharashtra Scooters is allowed. Cross-objections filed by the respondents in the first two cases are also disposed of in the above terms.
-
1996 (10) TMI 394 - SUPREME COURT
Liability for sales tax - Held that:- Appeal allowed. There is no endorsement on the bill of lading in favour of STC that would suggest transference to it of title in the tea. There is, therefore, nothing in the contract between the appellants and STC or in the manner of its execution that establishes that there was a transfer of the property in the tea by the appellants to STC before it was transferred to the Iranian buyer. Hence, the purchase of the tea by the appellants at the auctions in fulfilment of the export obligation to the Iranian buyer was the penultimate sale in the course of export and covered by the terms of section 5(3). It was, accordingly, exempt from the payment of sales tax.
-
1996 (10) TMI 387 - SUPREME COURT
Validity of statement was made on oath on behalf of the State Government - Held that:- Appeal allowed. As the State Government made a statement on oath before the High Court that was incorrect and the judgment of the High Court accepts and proceeds upon the basis of that statement. The High Court's judgment must, therefore, be set aside and the matter remanded to the High Court to be heard and decided afresh.
-
1996 (10) TMI 383 - SUPREME COURT
Whether "special boiling point spirit" and "shell hexane" are liable to be assessed at single point under Schedule I of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, or on multi-point scheme of taxation under section 5(1)(ii) of the said Act, read, in either case, with the provisions of section 5(1) of the Act?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The ultimate conclusion reached by the High Court that the brand of petrol having a flashing point below 24.4 degrees centigrade falls within item 57B in Schedule I is correct. After reaching that conclusion we find it difficult to appreciate why the High Court allowed the assessees' revision and remanded the cases to the Tribunal. Presumably the High Court overlooked the fact that it was admitted that the substances in question fell within the definition of "petrol" under section 2(xvii). Once the High Court found that they fell within item 57B in the First Schedule the levy on these substances would be in accordance with and at the rate stated in the said Schedule against the said item.
-
1996 (10) TMI 379 - SUPREME COURT
Whether under the facts and circumstances of the present case, the transfer of article by the respondent-assessee to its customers under the scheme floated by it constitute a sale against payment of price of that article?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. All the attributes, characteristics and requirements of a sale are present in the transaction. In fact the transaction is so designed and framed by the company by adopting a circuitous method for sale of their goods which amounts to nothing but a sale, and the same is liable to assessment under the Act. This view is further strengthened from the fact that during the relevant assessment year the respondent-company sent articles to its various customers under the scheme of the value of Rs. 1,36,665, which were purchased by the respondent-company for a sum of Rs. 1,03,709.25 and, thus, earned a profit to the tune of Rs. 32,955.75. The business so run by the respondent is with a view to earn profit out of the sale by adopting a circuitous device with a view to evade the payment of tax. Thus the High Court, therefore, was not justified in taking the view that it was not a sale transaction assessable to tax.
-
1996 (10) TMI 372 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Arbitration agreement - Validity of, Directors - Validity of acts of ... ... ... ... ..... isions it appears that Shri M.C. Aggarwal was authorised to enter into and execute all contracts of the nature of lease agreements and there being also ratification of the said agreements by the petitioner-company and there being also waiver and acquiescence on the part of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid lease agreements and also taking into consideration the fact that execu- tion of a contract is a managerial act relating to indoor management and functioning of the petitioner, I hold that the lease agreements coupled with the arbitration agreements cannot be said to be invalid on that count and cannot be declared to be not binding on the petitioner. 21. In view of the aforesaid findings arrived at by me on appreciation of the evidence on record and the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is entitled to no relief and, therefore, issue Nos. 5 and 6 are answered accordingly. The petition stands dismissed with costs. SCL q NOVEMBER, 1997
-
1996 (10) TMI 370 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Extension of postponement of contracts - Validity of ... ... ... ... ..... ed in the light of the final decision in the matter and not before. In the circumstances, I do not consider it appropriate to deal with the various other contentions urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners and they are left open. 38. In the facts and circumstances of the case, a direction shall issue to National Stock Exchange (NSE) - respondent No. 1, to take a final decision with regard to the Settlement No. 27 (trading period 3-7-1996 to 9-7-1996) in respect of the trades relating to scrip of Maruti Organics Ltd. (MOL) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 39. With the directions as above, the above writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. But, in the circumstances, without costs. ------------------------- (1) See also order in Writ Appeal No. 1317 of 1996 against this order at page 432, infra, holding, at the admission stage, that it was not maintainable. (2) See 1996 1 Comp LJ 75 (St.) (3) See 1996 1 Comp. LJ 75 (St.)
-
1996 (10) TMI 367 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Removal of director, Oppression and mismanagement –Power of Tribunal on application under sections 397 and 398
-
1996 (10) TMI 365 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... ring Counsel for the Companies, the Official Liquidator and Counsel for the Regional Director, Department of Company Affairs, Western Region, Bombay. I am satisfied that the Companies have complied with the requirements of sections 391 and 394 of the Indian Companies Act and that there is no valid objection to the scheme as approved by the shareholders of the respective Companies. In view of the above, both the Company Petitions have to be allowed. 7. Company Petition No. 11 -S/96 is allowed in terms of prayers (a) and (b) . 8.Company Petition No. 12-S/96 is allowed in terms of prayers (a) and (b) . 9. The Additional Registrar at Panaji is directed to transcribe this Order in Form No. 41 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 and in terms of the draft submitted. 10. Each of the Petitioners to pay cost of Rs. 1,000 to the Official Liquidator in the respective Company Petitions. 11. In the circumstances of the case, Company Petitions are accordingly disposed of. SCL q APRIL, 1997
-
1996 (10) TMI 363 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Transfer of shares, Declaration by person not holding beneficial interest in shares, Free transferability and registration of transfers of listed securities
-
1996 (10) TMI 347 - SUPREME COURT
Oppression and mismanagement - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. Perusing the report filed by the Registrar of Companies which shows that no substance was, ultimately, found therein. We agree with the Division Bench that this was no case for winding up the company and must dismiss the appeal filed by Mehra.
Insofar as Dubey's appeal is concerned Division Bench found that Dubey had appropriated to himself moneys belonging to the company. Mehra's presence on the Board would prevent a recurrence, thus protecting Mehra's interest and that of the company. We, therefore, find no substance in Dubey's appeal.
-
1996 (10) TMI 340 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - Duty paying documents ... ... ... ... ..... primary producer of zinc and the clearances effected from the factories of such manufacturers would be in bulk quantity and the purchases made by users like the present appellants would be small portions of such bulk clearances. They will not be in a position to produce any Gate Passes and only certificates and invoices from their suppliers would be available with them. This is what they had produced. Taking note of such problems the Government has modified the provisions permitting availment of Modvat credit on the strength of invoices issued by authorised persons, besides the manufacturers of the inputs themselves. The present dispute mostly relates to an earlier period, prior to the coming into force of such provisions. For the present case in the absence of any order of the Government withdrawing the facility allowed in respect of the certificates issued by Public Sector Undertakings, the impugned order cannot stand. We, therefore, set aside the same and allow the appeal.
-
1996 (10) TMI 336 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - Caustic soda lye ... ... ... ... ..... s upheld for the reason that the provisions of Rule 57A covers inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product which is of very wide import. See Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal - 1996 (82) E.L.T. 575 in the case of Shri Ramakrishna Steel Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras. The department itself has recognised its status as an eligible input as seen from the Trade Notice 59/89, dated 30-7-1989 in which it has been clarified that catalyst is an eligible input since it is actually used in the manufacture process. 7. emsp Regarding the other inputs in question viz., ferric alum and sulphuric acid, as well as indiflo perlite filteraid since the Commissioner (Appeals) has omitted to give any findings thereon, the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to give his findings on their eligibility to Modvat credit in accordance with law and after hearing the respondents in the matter. The appeal is disposed of in the above-terms.
-
1996 (10) TMI 334 - CEGAT, MADRAS
manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... the same. There is no contradiction to this plea. The use of the material by its manufacture into another notified material for pesticide has to be taken to be a technical necessity. The Tribunal in similar circumstances in the order referred to supra has held that the benefit of notification in such circumstances will be available. We take note of fact that the chemical received and the chemical manufactured by the appellants which is ultimately used in the manufacture of pesticide both are figuring under the notification. It can therefore be inferred the framers of the notification were aware of the use of the material through the route of another intermediate product. In view of the above and following ratio of the decision of the Tribunal, we hold that the appellants will be entitled to the benefit of notification subject to the verification of the use of the product manufacture by them for the manufacture of pesticide. The appeal is therefore allowed in the above terms.
-
1996 (10) TMI 332 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... wers invested in a Central Excise Officer. The ld. Advocate has produced copies of several notifications whereby various officers have been appointed either in the Directorate of A. E. or DRI and thereby they have been appointed in that particular Directorate only. So, it can be seen from these points that the Directorate of A. E. and DRI were treated as separate entities and officers were appointed separately in both the Directorates and they were appointed in specific Directorate only. Otherwise, the officer concerned could have been appointed as an officer, in A.E./D.R.I. In the light of the above discussion, we are of the view that the show cause notices in all the above appeals signed by the Assistant Director (A.E.) were without jurisdiction and so were invalid. As show cause notices were invalid, the adjudication proceedings following thereon were also rendered invalid. Following the ratio of this judgment, we allow this appeal and set aside the order of the Collector.
............
|
