|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 252 Records
-
1988 (4) TMI 399 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... lies before the High Court only against an order passed under sub-section (4) or (5) of section 10 of the Act. From a bare reading of the aforesaid subsections (4) and (5) of section 10, it is clear that the orders contemplated by the said two sub-sections are final orders which finally dispose of the appeal before the Tribunal. In my opinion, the present order which is subject-matter of consideration before me is not an order contemplated by the aforesaid sub-sections (4) and (5) of section 10 of the Act and no revision lies against the same. In these circumstances, I find that the present revision is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed with costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (4) TMI 398 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... words as aforesaid be not put in procrustean beds or shrunk to Lilliputian dimensions. In the case of Surendra Kumar Verma v. Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cumLabour Court (1980) 4 SCC 443, the Supreme Court had at page 447 occasion to say Semantic luxuries are misplaced in the interpretation of bread and butter statutes. Welfare statutes must, of necessity, receive a broad interpretation. Where legislation is designed to give relief against certain kinds of mischief, the court is not to make inroads by making etymological excursions. In this view of the matter also and having regard to the object of the notifications as aforesaid, it has to be held that sillis and gullis manufactured by karkhanedars are part of utensils within the meaning of the aforesaid notifications. No other point was pressed before me. In the result, all the revisions filed on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax fail and are hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (4) TMI 397 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... view from the Ashoka Marketing case 1970 26 STC 254 (SC) in Kasturi Lal Harlal v. State of U.P. 1987 64 STC 1 as well as in State of Orissa v. Orissa Cement Ltd. 1986 61 STC 79 (SC) AIR 1986 SC 178. In both the decisions, the earlier judgments of this Court mentioned above have been expressly overruled and section 14-A which had been held to be ultra vires was declared intra vires. 5.. In that view, the matter requires reconsideration by the sales tax authorities. The writ application is accordingly allowed and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Sales Tax (O.P. 2) for disposing of the petitioner s refund application afresh in the light of these developments and the changed circumstances, in accordance with law. Since the matter has remained pending in this Court for a long time, we hope that the Commissioner will dispose of the application with expedition and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. Writ application allowed.
-
1988 (4) TMI 396 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ten are used as oil-seeds. This position was conceded before the Bench on the earlier occasion by the Revenue. 10.. Although some other decisions were cited at the Bar, I do not think that they would be of much help in view of the direct decisions on the point, as they mostly deal with analogous subject. 11.. After a careful consideration of the object and purpose of the Act, I am of the view that the relevant entry in the notification under section 3-B of the Orissa Act excludes from its ambit only that variety of coconut by deliberately using the expression tender coconut , which contains mostly water or watery substance and no kernel which could yield any oil and thus would be completely outside the genus oil-seed . 12.. The answer to the question, therefore, must be given in favour of the dealers and against the Revenue. In the circumstances, however, I shall leave the parties to bear their own costs. G.B. PATNAIK, J.-I agree. Reference answered in favour of the dealers.
-
1988 (4) TMI 395 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s per the specification of the customers, as in this case, it ceases to be paper within the meaning of entry 143. Indeed this was the contention of the Revenue in the case reported in Bharat Litho Press v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1987 67 STC 53 (AP). There the department contended that the labels and wrappers are not paper-and succeeded, while it is taking a contrary stand in this case. Be that as it may, we do not see sufficient reason to differ from the earlier decision of this Court, particularly having regard to the nature of the labels and wrappers concerned herein. We may reiterate that if the paper is printed with a general design or material which can be used for packing or. wrapping of goods generally, it would still be packing paper or wrapping paper. Only where it is printed and cut for being used as label or wrapper for particular goods, it ceases to be packing or wrapping paper. For the above reasons, the tax revision case is allowed. No costs. Petition allowed.
-
1988 (4) TMI 394 - SUPREME COURT
Whether charges locally called tulai is a part of "purchase price" liable to tax?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The position that tulai shall be a part of delivery charges and in case it has been separately charged in respect of each of the sale transactions entered into between the customers and the assessee, the same would be entitled to exemption from tax. Otherwise it would come within the definitions of "purchase price" and "taxable turnover". This being the legal position, the matter has to be examined keeping this in view. We vacate the judgment of the High Court and remit the matter to it for a fresh disposal.
-
1988 (4) TMI 386 - SC ORDER
the attachment will continue for a period of four months from today, during which period the Sales Tax Department should complete the fresh assessments. Liberty is granted, however, to the appellant to apply to the Sales Tax Department for release of the bank accounts from attachment.
-
1988 (4) TMI 381 - SUPREME COURT
Constitutional validity of Notification Nos. STA. 1085/175/RES-8 dated 19th November, 1985 and STA. 1085/175/RES-8 dated 30th June, 1986 issued under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 challenged
Held that:- Writ petitions are allowed, the Notifications No. STA. 1085/175/RES-8 dated 19th November, 1985 and No. STA. 1085/175/RES-8 dated 30th June, 1986 are quashed in so far as they impose a rate of 4 per cent tax for television sets and antennae, television cameras, television monitors and components, parts and accessories of any of them
-
1988 (4) TMI 380 - SUPREME COURT
Whether, for the purpose of ensuring the same rate of tax between the petitioners and the local manufacturers, the levy of the higher rate of tax suffered by the petitioners should be quashed and they be held entitled to the levy of the lower rate applied to the local manufacturers or should the higher rate imposed on the petitioners be maintained and the notifications imposing the lower rate on local manufacturers be quashed?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. Notifications No. (GHN-51) GST 1081/(S.49) (109)-TH dated 23rd July, 1981 and No. (GHN-22) GST 1086/(S. 49) (173)-TH dated 29th March, 1986 prescribing a lower rate of tax for local manufacturers in respect of television sets and other electronic goods are quashed
-
1988 (4) TMI 379 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the materials used by the assessee for the contract works on behalf of the Public Works Department can be taxed under purchase tax under section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the instant case, the user must be in the other commodity and the expression "consumed otherwise" must be so construed.
-
1988 (4) TMI 378 - SUPREME COURT
Wwhether the sales effected by the respondent, were inter-State sales or not?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The High Court was correct to found that the goods were moved out of U.P. in pursuance of an agreement for sale entered into between the assessees and their customers. The existence of T.P. form IV was taken note of but that did not conclude the matter. The condition precedent for imposing sales tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, is that the goods must move out of the State in pursuance of some contract entered into between the seller and the purchaser. If that is a correct principle in law, the Tribunal applied this correct principle of law to the facts of this case taking into cognizance the existence of T.P. form.
-
1988 (4) TMI 352 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Restrictions on establishment of place of business in India ... ... ... ... ..... s made absolute in terms of prayer (a). The respondents are directed to give to the petitioners a proper hearing before deciding about their application for extension of permission. The petitioners should make a fresh representation before the respondents within four weeks from today. The respondents to give a hearing to the petitioners within four weeks thereafter and to pass an order giving reasons within four weeks thereafter. Under an order dated March 28, 1988, in this petition, the petitioners have been permitted to carry out the activity of inspection of non-n arine industrial machinery and equipment under the contract dated March 31, 1986, with John Gait International. The petitioners will be entitled to carry on the work under the said contract until the final decision of the respondents is given under section 29 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, and for a period of two weeks thereafter. In the circumstances of the case there will be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 344 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... is to be paid along with the monthly installment. The company will also pay the cost of this application assessed at 30 G. Ms. which shall be paid along with the first installment. If the payments are made in terms of this order, the winding up application shall remain permanently stayed. In default of payment of any two consecutive installments or the last installment including the interest and costs, the petitioning-creditor will be entitled to execute this order as a decree of court. The company will be entitled to deduct income-tax at source from the bills of the petitioning-creditor and will give a certificate to the petitioning-creditor under section 194A of the Income-tax Act. If no installment is paid at all in terms of this order, the petitioning-creditor will be entitled to mention the matter for further direction for admission of the petition. All parties concerned to act on a signed copy of the operative portion of this judgment and order on the usual undertaking.
-
1988 (4) TMI 343 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Shares warrants and entries in register of members, Transfer to shares – Power to refuse registration and appeal against refusal, Power of court to rectify register of members
-
1988 (4) TMI 327 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Oppression and mismanagement, Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... rder under section 443(1)(d) of the Act. The power of the court in this connection is not disputed, but learned counsel for the petitioner objects to such a prayer being allowed mainly on the ground that that will prejudice the interest of the shareholders in minority and such a course would give premium to the illegal acts which the other directors of the company have been perpetuating. Mr. Mukherjee has referred to some decisions which mainly deal with the powers of the court, but the discretion for directing sale of the shares of the minority group would not be a solution to the problem which has arisen in this case. In the result, I would refuse to pass an order of winding up of the company on the ground that it would be just and equitable, but it will be open to the petitioner to seek redress against the company in accordance with law on proof of the injury alleged to have been caused to him. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (4) TMI 319 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Winding-up of unregistered companies ... ... ... ... ..... rtners. What is sought is the dissolution of the body of persons which answers to the description of an unregistered company within the meaning of section 582 of the Companies Act. Winding-up proceedings commenced in that behalf is not a civil suit. Nor is the company court a civil court. It is a proceeding of special nature and character which provides for winding up of not only companies incorporated under the Act but also any other body of persons which will answer to the description of an unregistered company. What is being decided in this proceeding is whether an unregistered company should or should not be wound up. In that view of the matter, section 34 of the Arbitration Act which expressly refers to any legal proceeding against any other party to the agreement cannot be construed to have any application to a proceeding which in its very nature is a proceeding which will result in an order in rem and not in personam. Therefore, Application No. 319 of 1988 is rejected.
-
1988 (4) TMI 318 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Winding up - Avoidance of transfer, etc., after commencement of ... ... ... ... ..... a discretion will, of course, have to be exercised in every instance having regard to the particular circumstances of the particular case (vide Burton and Deakin Ltd., In re 1977 1 All ER 631 at page 637 (Ch D). Certainly, if I refuse sanction, it will be a great setback to the honest and genuine attempt of the company to rehabilitate itself. I do not think that this court should hold back the company from making an attempt to rehabilitate itself. I feel that the leave for disposition sought for is necessary and expedient in the interest of the company and I hold that the reasons given are such that an intelligent and honest man could reasonably hold, and the court will normally sanction the disposition, notwithstanding the opposition. In the result, I would allow the petition. I permit the applicant company, Travancore Rayons Ltd., Rayonpuram, Perumbavoor, to create a charge of Rs. 511 lakhs over the movable properties of the company in favour of IDBI, ICIGI, IFCI and IRBI.
-
1988 (4) TMI 303 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Classification - ... ... ... ... ..... Plaintiffs but only against the 1st Appellants (Union of India). Whether the figure will be required to be revised upward will depend upon what we decide in the Civil Application. The 1st Appellants will pay interest on the said amount at 12 per annum from 1st June, 1988. As the amount is substantial and since we have awarded interest, we direct the 1st Appellants to deposit the amount in this Court on or before 31st July, 1988. As and when the deposit is made the liability to pay interest would cease. In case the deposit is made the original Plaintiffs will have liberty to apply for permission to withdraw the same and apply the same in satisfaction of the Decree. 32. emsp This disposes of the Appeal subject to the result of the Civil Application. 33. emsp As far as the costs of the Suit and of the Appeal are concerned, we think the parties should bear their own costs of the Appeal but the original 1st Defendants will pay to the original Plaintiffs half the costs of the suit.
-
1988 (4) TMI 299 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ing to Chapter 48 and Tariff sub-heading 4818.13 relied upon by the learned advocate pertains to the existing tariff and cannot be taken as a guide to the tariff entries as they stood at the relevant time i.e. 1982 and 1983. The learned J.D.R. during the course of arguments had pointed out that the said Trade Notice does not cover the product under consideration here. The said Trade Notice refers to containers fitted with reinforcing circular bands of other materials .... rdquo . It does not mean that the end-portions of the container, namely bottom and lid made of metals of the container are also covered by this expression. We are not called upon in the instant cases to interpret the Tariff sub-heading 4818.13 and the Trade Notice referred to by the learned advocate. 8. Having regard to the foregoing discussion, we do not agree that the composite containers are covered by the Tariff Entry 17(4)/17(3) and by the Notification 66/82 (as amended). Hence the appeals are rejected.
-
1988 (4) TMI 298 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... ch price difference could not conceivably be had by bona fide price negotiations. We do not consider that totally unreal price has to be debited to the import licence just because the appellants declared it as the c.i.f. value of the goods. It is true that no proof of extra remittance is forthcoming. But by its very nature, evidence of extra remittance can be had only in a rare case because there are numerous subtle and indirect ways of making the extra remittance to the foreign suppliers. In view of this discussion we also confirm the findings of lower authority as to violation of I.T.C. Regulations. We feel that the fine and penalty imposed are excessive. To meet the ends of justice, we reduce the fine in lieu of confiscation from Rs. 40000/- to Rs. 20000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) and penalty from Rs. 20000/-to Rs. 10000/- (Rupees ten thousand only). Except for this modification in the order, the findings of the lower authority are confirmed and the appeal is rejected.
........
|
