|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 287 Records
-
1988 (8) TMI 421
... ...
... ... ..... Court for fresh disposal according to law ....." 15. Accordingly this appeal is partly allowed, the Judgment of the High Court dated 30th September, 1983, in Crl. Appeal No. 1320 of 1982 is set aside and the appeal is remitted to the High Court with the direction to re-admit it, and hear and dispose of the same on the merits afresh. We hope and trust that it will be possible for the High Court to dispose of the appeal most expeditiously. The High Court, should it consider it necessary or appropriate, might consider calling for expert medical- evidence- of course with appropriate opportunity to the defence'-on the point of the effect of the injuries on the speech and consciousness of Harish. This is of entirely left to the High Court. 16. During the pendency of the appeal before the High Court pursuant to this order, the respondents shall be enlarged on bail to the satisfaction of the Sessions Court, Bareilly. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. Appeal allowed partly.
-
1988 (8) TMI 420
... ...
... ... ..... ould not have come to terminate in the present manner. The records of the case have become unusually bulky and but for the continued assistance of Mr. Pramod Dayal, a member of the bar of this Court, it would indeed have been difficult for us as also parties and their advocates to handle the matter with ease. Mr. Parmod Dayal deserves our commendation for the labour he has put in. He was appearing for some of the lessees but the assisted the Court very willingly as and when called upon. We are of the view that he should be paid a total sum of ₹ 5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand only) for the services rendered. We direct the Union of India to deposit the said amount with the Registry of this Court within two weeks from now. This amount when deposited shall be paid to Mr. Parmod Dayal. The writ petitions are disposed of. There would be no order for A costs. We direct that the reports of the two Committees, as and when received, shall be placed before this Court for directions.
-
1988 (8) TMI 419
... ...
... ... ..... m time to time and mentioned hereinbefore, does not suffer from any vice of being not regulatory or compensatory taxation nor from the vice of being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In that view of the matter, the challenge to the provisions of the Act as amended after the judgment of the PG NO 495 Bombay High Court cannot be maintained. In that view of the matter, Civil Appeals Nos. 1631-1633 of 1987 are disposed of by saying that after the amendments noted here in before the Act does not suffer from the vice mentioned in the judgment of the High Court of Bombay. The appeals are, therefore, allowed and disposed of accordingly. In that view of the matter the challenge made in the special leave petitions Nos. 11673-75 of t987 is dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no orders as to costs. Interim orders, if any, are vacated. The taxes will be realised in accordance with the Act and necessary adjustments will be made accordingly. S.L.
-
1988 (8) TMI 418
... ...
... ... ..... e facts in which the decision in Mansaram's case was rendered clearly indicate that it does not support the argument put forward on behalf of the appellant and no aid therefrom can be taken. The case of the plaintiff, there, was that the appellant-tenant had occupied the premises in question about 22 years earlier illegally and was, therefore, liable to eviction,out of which the appeal before the Supreme Court arose was filed, there were numerous proceedings between the original landlord and the tenant and this question about the PG NO 345 illegal entry of the appellant had never been raised and it was only after the death of the original landlord that a "total stranger" had come forward to raise the issue and it was held that he was not entitled to do so. The principle of waiver was clearly applicable. We, therefore, do not find substance in any of the points urged on behalf of the appellant. The appeals are accordingly dismissed with costs. Appeals dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 417
... ...
... ... ..... emarks. He has been assessed assessed as a serious, intelligent and quiet type of officer. He took interest in group discussions. These are indeed the best qualities of any officer. The inferiority complex attributed to the appellant in that report cannot outweigh those good qualities. It is more often the superiority complex that causes harm to the public and not the inferiority complex. 6. The denial of senior time scale to the appellant, in any event, is therefore wholly unjustified and arbitrary. We must, therefore, allow the appeal directing the State of Maharashtra to give the appellant senior time scale with effect from the date on which his juniors were given. He should also be given consequential benefits as per rules regulating his service. 7. In the result, we allow the appeal, setting aside the order of the Tribunal. A direction shall issue as indicated above. The appellant is entitled to his costs. But all the CMPs filed by the appellant are, however, dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 416
... ...
... ... ..... resentation on 22.12.1987 and according to the statement of the Central Government, it disposed of some representation of another date, it must be assumed that that representation was not considered and disposed of. We do not find any merit in the presumption raised by the petitioner on account of the error in the date mentioned by the Central Government as the matter stands clarified by the Counter Affidavit of Shri Shiv Basant, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India stating that it was the petitioner’s representation which was disposed of and the error pointed out was accidental. We are satisfied that the error in the date referred to by the petitioner was clerical in nature and that the Central Government had, in fact, rejected the petitioner’s representation after duly considering it. 12. In the result, we do not find any merit in any of the points pressed on behalf of the petitioner and the writ application is, there-fore, dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 415
... ...
... ... ..... service in the reduced post be treated as service in the post held by him prior to imposition of the penalty, subject to the condition, however, that the appellant shall not be entitled to any difference of salary for and during the period of reduction. In view of this, we think that the proceedings taken against him should come to an end and there is no need to remit the matter to the Disciplinary-Authority for selection and imposition of a fresh penalty. (ii) In the case of M.J. Ninama the penalty of reduction in rank is set aside and he shall be restored to the post which he held before the imposition of the penalty. However, for the period, if any, served by him in the lower post pursuant to the penalty imposed on him, he shall not be entitled to the difference of salary. It will also not be necessary to remit his case for fresh consideration of the choice of the penalty having regard to the lapse of time. It is ordered and the appeals disposed of accordingly. No costs.
-
1988 (8) TMI 414
... ...
... ... ..... y pass a decree" by an amendment passed in 1963, making it mandatory to pass the decree. When the Legislature had made its intention clear in specific terms, there was no scope for Shri Bhasme’s appeal to ‘the spirit of the law’ and not to the strict letter of the law. In the aforesaid view of the matter, this appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. But in the facts and circumstances of the case. the parties will pay and bear their own costs. Furthermore, in order to cause less hardship in the situation, we direct that the appellant will have six months time to vacate the premises in question, provided they file an undertaking within six weeks from this date to this Court that they will deliver vacant possession of the premises to the landlord after the expiry of six months from this date and to go on paving rent compensation until possession is given and not to induct or let anybody in the premises in question. in the usual terms. Appeal dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 413
Unauthorised sub-letting - eviction orders - Held that:- The High Court did not deal specifically with the question whether, in the circumstances of the case, an inference that the parting of the exclusive possession was prompted by monetary consideration could be drawn or not. The High Court, did not examine this aspect of the matter, as according to it, one of the essential ingredients, viz., of exclusive possession had not been established. lf exclusive possession established, and the version of the respondent as to the particular and the incidents of the transaction is found unacceptable in the particular facts and circumstances of the case, it may not be impermissible for the Court to draw an inference that the transaction was entered into with monetary consideration in in mind.
In the circumstances of the case, we think, that appellants having been forced by the Court's-below to have established possession of the Ice- Cream Vendor of a part of the demised-premises and the explanation of the transaction offered by the respondent having been found by the Courts-below to be unsatisfactory and unacceptable, it was not impermissible for the Courts to draw an inference, having regard to the ordinary course of human conduct, that the transaction must have been entered into for monetary considerations. There is no explanation forth-coming from the respondent appropriate to the situation as found. This Appeal is allowed, the order of the High Court under Appeal is set aside and the order of eviction passed by the Courts-below restored. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, we grant time to the respondent to vacate and yield up the vacant possession till 31st December,1988.
-
1988 (8) TMI 412
Whether on the ground of absence of reasons, the award is bad per se, is pending consideration by a Constitution Bench?
Held that:- In the present case the arbitrator gave no reasons for the award. There is no legal proposition which is the basis of the award, far less any legal proposition which is erroneous. Also there is no allegation of any misconduct in the proceedings. It is an error of law apparent on the face of it and not mistake of fact which could be the ground for challenging the award.
In that view of the matter this part of the award, which was affirmed by the High Court of granting of interest, must be deleted.
-
1988 (8) TMI 411
Challenging the order of acquittal recorded by the Allahabad High Court
Held that:- The post crime conduct of the accused cannot also be lost sight of. The plea of alibi has not been pursued. It has been proved that the accused was not available in the town after the occurrence till 34 November 1977. It is on record that the accused could not be traced and proceedings under sec. 82/83 Cr. Penal Code were initiated. The warrant of arrest issued against the accused returned unserved. There-after proclamation was made and his property was attached. That was on 23 November 1977. He appeared on the next day in the Police Station Kotwali. That has been proved by the general diary entry (Ex.Ka. 22) of the said Police Station.
It may be noted that the investigation in this case was conducted without loss of time. Since the murder was committed at a public place where the Sub-Divisional magistrate and Tehsildar were present, the Investigating Officer must have been keen to arrest the accused immediately. That was perhaps the reason why he took proceedings under sec. 82/83 Cr.P.C. We must really appreciate the proper and prompt investigation made in this case.
We have given our anxious consideration to all material facts and circumstances of the case. It seems to us, that the decision of the High Court cannot be supported.
-
1988 (8) TMI 410
... ...
... ... ..... did not make any request for an opportunity to adduce evidence in support of his plea that the disputed turnover was not liable to tax. It is true that the assessing authority has examined the entire question from the view point that the purchasers from the petitioner were registered dealers. Such an examination was inevitable having regard to the fact that the petitioner himself stated in the lists furnished by him that the purchasers were registered dealers. Therefore, the view taken by the assessing authority cannot be disturbed on this count. Barring one or two stray instances, all the other purchasers were claimed by the petitioner as registered dealers. In the circumstances, the question of affording any opportunity now to the petitioner to adduce evidence before the assessing authority or the appellate authority would not arise. For these reasons, the writ petition fails and accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 300. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 409
... ...
... ... ..... disputed that the septic tanks sold by the assessee were made of cement. We are, therefore, of the view that such septic tanks would come within the meaning of the words, cement goods used in entry No. 19 of Part III of Schedule II of the Act. Entry No. 45 of Part II of Schedule II of the Act deals with sanitary goods and fittings thereof . Septic tanks made of cement cannot be treated to be sanitary goods or fittings thereof, because in common parlance, septic tanks are not understood to be sanitary wares or sanitary goods. We are, therefore, of the view that the Tribunal was right in holding that the sale of septic tanks was liable to tax under entry No. 19 of Part III of Schedule II of the Act and not under entry No. 45 of Part II of Schedule II of the Act. Accordingly, this reference is decided against the department and in favour of the assessee. 4.. In the circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1988 (8) TMI 408
... ...
... ... ..... tive. When the order of confiscation itself was challenged before the appellate authority, by necessary implication, the appellate authority will have the powers and duties to stay the sale proceedings in pursuance of the confiscation. The power of granting relief is available to the appellate authority as an incidental power to make the exercise of those powers fully effective. We would accordingly set aside the order dated 9th August, 1988, passed by the appellate authority and direct the appellate authority to decide the stay application, which will be filed afresh, on the basis that it has power to grant relief of stay of auction during the pendency of the appeal against the order of confiscation. The auction proceedings fixed for 17th August, 1988, will remain stayed till the consideration afresh by the appellate authority of the additional application for stay of auction. The writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Writ petition allowed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 407
... ...
... ... ..... huge loss to the State exchequer. 6.. It is thus clear that by issuing the notice as contained in annexure 2, the assessing authority was exercising its power under section 19 of the Act. In the circumstances of this case, the assessing authority could have served notice on the petitioner within eight years of the expiry of the assessment year, i.e., 1976-77. Since the notice was not served on the petitioner by March 31, 1985, respondent No. 3 had no jurisdiction to reopen the matter under section 19 of the Finance Act. If it had no jurisdiction to do so, it had no jurisdiction to ask for production of the books of account under section 33 of the Finance Act. 7.. For the reasons aforesaid, I am of the opinion that respondent No. 3 was bound to confine itself to the direction of the appellate authority. That being the position, the petitioner must succeed in this writ petition. 8.. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and annexure 2 is quashed. Writ petition allowed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 406
... ...
... ... ..... o in South Eastern Railway case 1973 32 STC 171 (Cal) is not applicable in the facts of the present case with full force, and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief whatsoever and, as such, the order passed by the Member, West Bengal Commercial Taxes Tribunal, does not call for any interference by this Court, as no finality has been reached and no prejudice has been caused to the writ petitioners. More so, in my view, the decision reported in South Eastern Railway case 1973 32 STC 171 (Cal) has no manner of application and the decision of the Madras High Court in 1978 41 STC 105 (State of Tamil Nadu v. The Hindu) is applicable. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The rule is discharged. The Commercial Tax Officer will now decide the matter as expeditiously as possible. There will be no order as to costs. As prayed for by Mr. Siddhartha Chatterjee, learned Advocate for the writ petitioner, operation of this order is stayed for six weeks. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 405
... ...
... ... ..... allenging the order of assessment on the ground of illegality, or want of jurisdiction at any future point of time, cannot form the basis for invoking the revisional power of the Commissioner. On the other hand, the Commissioner while exercising his revisional jurisdiction, in setting aside the order passed by the C.T.O., who was not the competent assessing authority, had in his mind, the want of jurisdiction of the officer, which can, at any time be the ground for questioning the assessment order. Therefore, mere chance or possibility of such an action being taken by the assessee and to ask for refund of the tax paid on that ground, is sufficient to clothe the Commissioner with the power and reason to cancel the assessment. Therefore, the order made by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Vigilance), Bangalore (annexure-D), on the facts of the present case is justified, both on facts and in law, and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 404
... ...
... ... ..... ion from liability to sales tax on the proceeds realised by the sale of the Standard-20 ambulance van to M/s. Union Co. (Motors) Private Ltd., Madras, in turn sold to the Agarwal Relief Trust, for use in the Agarwal Hospital. Since the second respondent kept the matter pending on his file and ultimately returned it stating that the first respondent should be approached for the relief, the petitioner was obliged to file a revision petition under section 32 of the Act to the first respondent complaining that the second respondent ought to have granted the relief. So this Court hold that the order of the second respondent declining to exercise the powers conferred on him under section 55 of the Act and referring the petitioner to invoke section 32 of the Act and approach the first respondent is ex facie wrong and illegal and is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Under the circumstances, there is no order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.
-
1988 (8) TMI 403
... ...
... ... ..... nt material on record for holding that the tape which the assessee is selling, is commercially a different commodity. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the tape sold by the assessee was not covered by entry No. 4 of Notification No. 1035-537-ST dated 7th April, 1967 as a different material had come into existence not covered by the said notification. 12.. As regards the other question it is not in dispute that the tax has been deposited by the assessee on the basis of the return submitted by it and therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that penalty under section 17(3) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 was validly imposed. 13.. Accordingly, the references are allowed and our answer to each of the two questions referred to us, is in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 14.. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1988 (8) TMI 402
... ...
... ... ..... that one which leaves him with a lighter burden -Per Krishnaswami Ayyangar, J., in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bosotto Brothers Ltd. AIR 1940 Mad. 366 at page 368 1940 8 ITR 41 (Mad.) (SB). The said principle applies to a case whereby clearly an income can be brought under either of two heads -see H.C. Kothari v. Commissioner of Income-tax AIR 1952 Mad. 227 at page 229 1951 20 ITR 579 (Mad.) (DB). So we hold that entry No. 88 will not take within its sweep plastic suit cases and plastic brief cases. In this view of the matter, we are of the view that the plastic suit cases and plastic brief cases sold by the appellants can be taxed only under entry No. 156 of the First Schedule of the Act at 8 per cent. 10.. In the light of the above, we hold that the majority decision of the Appellate Tribunal to the contrary is erroneous in law. We set aside the decision of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and allow these revisions. There shall be no order as to costs. Petitions allowed.
........
|
