|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 228 Records
-
1983 (12) TMI 271 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... (2) to (5) of that rule might be adopted in the case of a dealer whose annual turnover exceeded Rs. 40,000, at his option which should be intimated to the assessing authority. In the present case, since the assessee himself filed quarterly returns, he must be regarded as having intimated to the assessing authority his option to be assessed according to the method prescribed in rule 21. No particular form had been prescribed for intimating such option of the assessee for adopting the method of filing quarterly returns. Hence, the quarterly returns filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1966-67 could form the basis for assessment otherwise than under section 12-A. As stated earlier, the assessee had also filed voluntarily his annual return for the year 1966-67. Hence, the time-limit specified under section 12-A of the Act, has no application to this case and the assessment cannot be said to be time-barred. 5.. In the result, we do not admit this petition but dismiss it.
-
1983 (12) TMI 270 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... o not help their case. So far as the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bharat Oxygen, Lucknow 1980 UPTC 686 is concerned, in that case also while observing that in order to constitute manufacture the article produced either by physical labour or by mechanical process should be oil a large scale and should pass as a commercial commodity from hand to hand could be valid only if the expression manufacture was to be understood in the sense in which it was used in common parlance. That observation loses validity when viewed in the light of the artificial definition of the word manufacture contained in section 2(e-1) of the Act. In the result both these revision applications succeed and are allowed. The order of the Sales Tax Tribunal dated 22nd March, 1982, is set aside and that passed by the Sales Tax Officer and affirmed by the Assistant Commissioner (judicial), Moradabad, in appeal in the cases of the two assessees are restored. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.
-
1983 (12) TMI 269 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... r at the customer s place and whether Rs. 4 per crate was collected as incidents of sale. If the goods were sold at the sales depot, there may be every justification for the petitioner to claim deduction of that charges under rule 6(4)(f) and (ff) since it was the petitioner who paid the packing and freight charges. That charges could properly be considered as post-sale activities. If on the other hand, the sale was effected at the place of the customer, the relief may be difficult unless it was collected as incident of sale. 10.. In the result, and for the reasons stated above, this petition is allowed. The orders of the authorities below are set aside and the matter stands remitted to the assessing authority to dispose of the matter in the light of the observations made and in accordance with law, after affording opportunity to the petitioner to produce evidence, if any. The parties may appear before the assessing authority on 12th January, 1984, to receive further orders.
-
1983 (12) TMI 268 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e was required. If that part of the total turnover of the assessee, which was relatable to the goods for which exemption certificate was required under the notification, was below the incidence of taxation then no liability to tax could be imposed upon such an assessee and the requirement of obtaining an exemption certificate could not be fastened to him, in the absence of a turnover above the taxable limit. The view taken by the-Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the Board of Revenue in the present cases, that no tax was leviable upon the assessee under the Act, appears to be justified. Thus, our answer to the question referred to us in the aforesaid three cases is that the expression turnover occurring in the notification dated 24th November, 1959, issued under section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, should be interpreted as referable to that part of the gross turnover of the dealer, in respect of which an exemption certificate was required under the said notification.
-
1983 (12) TMI 267 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of sales of allopathic medicines during the period of 1st April, 1957, to 5th May, 1957. The assessing authority was, therefore, not justified in imposing tax upon the assessee in respect of his turnover relating to sale of allopathic medicines during the aforesaid period from 1st April, 1957, to 5th May, 1957. The second question is answered accordingly. Thus, our answer to the first question is in the negative and against the revenue. As regards the second question we have held that the period of 30 days prescribed in rule 12 for filing renewal application is directory and the renewal of the exemption certificate once granted could not be ignored, until set aside or cancelled by competent authority in accordance with law. We are, therefore, of the view that the turnover of the assessee relating to sale of allopathic medicines during the period from 1st April, 1957, to 5th May, 1957, could not be taxed and the imposition of tax in respect thereof is liable to be set aside.
-
1983 (12) TMI 266 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... all sales of vegetables, fresh fruits, betel and plantain leaves, flowers, eggs, meat and fish (other than canned meat and fish) and the purchases of potatoes were exempted from the tax payable under the Act. Whatever might be the position with reference to green chillies , at no point of time red ripe or fruit chillies were ever considered as vegetables and it is therefore manifest that red ripe or fruit chillies would not fall within the expression vegetables , even on a consideration of the history of the notifications granting the exemption. Thus, looked at from any point of view, red ripe or fruit chillies would not be comprehended within the scope of the expression vegetables occurring in the notification granting exemption. Under those circumstances, the authorities below were quite correct in declining to countenance the claim for exemption put forth by the petitioners. Consequently, the tax revision cases are dismissed. There will be, however, no order as to costs.
-
1983 (12) TMI 265 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... said that Hukami Chand is a dealer or not, in the absence of any detailed enquiry. If Hukami Chand is found to be a dealer as defined in the Act, then his sale will be a taxable sale. On the other hand, if he is found to be not a dealer and doing no business at all, then his sale has to be taken as a non-taxable sale and consequently, the assessee s sale should be taken to be the first taxable sale in this State. As already stated, none of the authorities have gone into the question as to whether Hukami Chand is really a dealer as defined in the Act or not. Since that question is material for deciding the question as to whether the assessee s sale is a first sale, as claimed by the Revenue or a second sale, as claimed by the assessee, we allow this appeal and remit the matter to the Tribunal to dispose of the matter afresh, after giving a finding as to whether Hukami Chand, from whom the assessee had purchased the car, is a dealer or not. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1983 (12) TMI 264 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ks and if the lower appellate Court, after taking into consideration the material on record, has either accepted or rejected the account books, the finding arrived at on the inference drawn from the evidence by the appellate Court cannot be said to raise any question of law so as to call for its scrutiny in revision under section 11(1) of the Act with regard to its correctness or otherwise. In the present case I find that the Tribunal has, after taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and material on record, accepted the account books of the dealer, and there appears to be no legal error in it. The case stands concluded by the finding of fact and does not involve any question of law so as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of revisional power under section II of the Act. In the result, the revision fails and is accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, I, however, direct that the parties shall bear their own costs.
-
1983 (12) TMI 263 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... see were covered in the expression accessories or parts thereof used in entry No. 1 of third annexure. Exemption from payment of tax on purchase or sale of raw material has been categorised in two categories in the above mentioned notification. In respect of goods mentioned in annexure I it is available for five or three years but in respect of goods mentioned in annexure III no such rider is put. It is available to any unit and not only to new units, what could be the policy behind it and on what basis the classification in respect of goods has been made is not up for consideration but where there are two competing entries and manufacturer is covered by both then the entry granting exemption which is more beneficial to assessee should be held applicable to it. The Tribunal therefore did not commit any error in allowing amendment in recognition certificate under section 48 of the Act. In the result this revision fails and is dismissed with costs which is assessed at Rs. 100.
-
1983 (12) TMI 262 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f the turnover or that he has deliberately submitted an inaccurate turnover, specially in view of the fact that subsequently Madan Mohan had got himself registered as a registered dealer and had also paid sales tax on the alleged suppressed turnover indicated in the seized account books. This explanation appears to have found favour with the lower revisional authority while quashing the order imposing penalty on the opposite party. It, therefore, cannot be said that the order passed by the lower revisional authority is perverse or that it is based on non-consideration of material facts or on consideration of inadmissible evidence. The exercise of discretion by the revising authority cannot be said to be arbitrary, and is not liable to interference by this Court as it raises no question of law nor the order suffers from the error of jurisdiction. In the result the revision being devoid of merits is accordingly dismissed. I, however, direct the parties to bear their own costs.
-
1983 (12) TMI 261 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... supply. The Appellate Tribunal held that it is a contract for sale under the erroneous impression that there was no material on record to show the nature of service rendered by the assessee for erecting and commissioning the boiler. It had failed to take into account the memo filed by the assessee in which the entire process was explained. The memo which now forms part of the record clearly discloses that the work of erection is as much important as the supply of the boilers and the whole contract is a single and indivisible one. The amount stipulated for the contract was in a lump sum. There is nothing to show that separate amounts were charged towards cost and services. In the circumstances, we have no hesitation in holding that the contract is one for work and labour and not for sale. In the result, the tax revision case is allowed and the orders of the lower Tribunals are set aside holding that the assessee is not liable to pay sales tax.No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150.
-
1983 (12) TMI 260 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the contract between the Union of India and the appellant for manufacture and supply of MIG engines was a contract of sale as contended by the revenue or a works contract as submitted by the assessee?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. In the case of a contract for sale, the thing produced as whole has individual existence as the sole property of the party who produced it some time before delivery and the property therein passes only under the contract relating thereto to the other party for price. This cannot be said to be in respect of any of the items involved in these transactions. These transactions were carried out in implementation of the entrustment job for the manufacture by H.A.L. and all payments and actions taken in this behalf were on behalf of the Government of India.
Therefore the Tribunal was in error in concluding that there was sale involved in these transactions.
-
1983 (12) TMI 259 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the turnover apportioned from the job works undertaken by the appellant related to the sales of materials by the appellant to the Indian Air Force or other private parties, as the case may be, and as such whether these were taxable as held by the lower appellate authority?
Whether, in the case of job works undertaken from the private parties mainly on quotation on inclusive-price-basis, the sales tax authorities were right in apportioning a portion of the turnover as attributable towards sales of materials?
Held that:- Appeal allowed .High Court of Karnataka was not right in its conclusion on the taxability of the turnover of the spare parts and materials supplied in execution of appellant's job works. As a result except for the item on canteen sales which is not in dispute before us, these appeals are allowed. The necessary adjustments in the assessments should be made.
-
1983 (12) TMI 244 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Associations and partnerships exceeding certain numbers – Prohibition of, Prospectus – Registration of
-
1983 (12) TMI 243 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
General provisions with respect to memorandum and articles - Effect of memorandum and articles, Powers of Court to rectify register of members, Meetings and proceedings - Explanatory statement to be annexed to notice
-
1983 (12) TMI 242 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Allotment of shares ... ... ... ... ..... pointed out by Shanmukham J., when once the allotment was void ab initio, there could be no contrariety in the eye of law and none amongst the petitioner and respondents Nos. 11 to 14 could be a member of the first respondent. The decision of the Supreme Court has dealt with a situation where a director of a banking company dealt with shares on the footing that the allottees are the holders of the shares with a clear knowledge of the circumstances that he was interested in the particular transaction of the board meeting of the company. In a suit by the company against the allottees, he was held to be estopped from contending that the allotment was invalid. We are not facing any such contingency. Here, the transaction was void ab initio and there is no scope for bringing in the principle of estoppel at all. For the reasons expressed by us above, we are obliged to concur with the decision of Shanmukham J. and, as a result, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.
-
1983 (12) TMI 241 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
inspection of books of account, etc., of companies ... ... ... ... ..... beyond the scope of inspection under section 209A and would trespass into the arena of investigation under section 237 of the Act, would have to be considered on the facts and circumstances of the case and no particular direction in that behalf is issued in this judgment. (5)After inspection of books of account and other books and papers as contemplated by sub-section (1) of the section, if the respondents require any statement, information or explanation relating to the affairs of the company from any director, officer or employee of the company, the respondents would be at liberty to exercise such rights as are available to them under sub-sections (2) and (5) of the section. The writ appeal and the writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions. There will be no order as to costs. Carbon copy of this judgment may be granted to the counsel for the Central Government free of charge and to the counsel for the petitioners on usual terms if applied for in that behalf.
-
1983 (12) TMI 240 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Shares warrants and entries in register of members ... ... ... ... ..... ic is entitled to subscribe to its shares remains, and must be upheld to the exclusion of any individuals or group interests. The approach in this matter has not to be allowed to be swayed by likes and dislikes of individuals or other considerations. That would be like placing momentary strains of expediency on the too well recognised concepts of a public limited company. It is futile to say that the sponsors of the company must in perpetuity continue to have a hold. Rather it is more the investment of the public money in the form of shares which ushers in the growth and development of the company. For the managerial capacities, the persons concerned are duly paid their emoluments, and they are not essentially removed or themselves leave on mere change in the share structure of the company. Moreover, those who continue to retain the shares still have a say in its affairs and profits commensurate with their holdings. The result, therefore, is that the application is dismissed.
-
1983 (12) TMI 213 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Oppression and Mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... an arbitration proceeding, or for that matter an award, the court s jurisdiction under sections 397 and 398 cannot stand fettered. On the other hand, courts have gone to the length to hold that the matter which can form the subject-matter of a petition under sections 397 and 398 cannot be the subject-matter of an arbitration for an arbitrator can have no powers such as are conferred on the court, such as section 402 of the Companies Act. Furthermore, as pointed out by Mr. Doctor, the scope of the two enquiries, namely, that of the petition for setting aside the award, and this petition (No. 577 of 1983) under sections 397 and 398 are wholly different. In view of all this, section 10, CPC, read with section 141 can have no application whatsoever, nor can, in view of the above discussion, the question of exercising powers under section 151 arise. In the result, the company application fails. The same is dismissed. The costs of the company application will be costs in the cause.
-
1983 (12) TMI 211 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up – Powers of liquidator ... ... ... ... ..... eeks. Subject to the direction given above, the appeal is thus allowed and the summons made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a),( b) and (c). But we further direct that till December 31, 1984, the official liquidator shall not in any way part with possession. We may also make it clear that in the view which we have taken, the official liquidator will be entitled to ask respondent No. 2 to vacate the premises at such time as the official liquidator thinks it necessary for handing over possession of those premises also to the appellants and, accordingly, respondent No. 2 shall hand over possession to the official liquidator. In any case, respondent No. 2 shall deliver possession to the official liquidator by November 30, 1984. Mr. Chinai wants to be safeguarded against any immediate dispossession. In the interest of justice, it will be sufficient to direct that respondent No. 2 will not in any case be dispossessed prior to March 31, 1984. There will be no order as to costs.
........
|
