-
1992 (6) TMI 186
... ... ... ... ..... erits in the appeal. The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs. All interim orders made in this appeal, save as provided hereinabove are vacated. The appeal has been heard for about seven days and in view, of the fact that the contentions that were raised in this appeal were not at all raised before the trial Court and were raised for the first time before the appeal court and in view of our judgment and order we assess the costs at 700 Gms. The costs are to be paid within a fortnight from the date of service of the sig....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 185
... ... ... ... ..... think that there is any case to issue a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from disturbing the amenities enjoyed by the plaintiff in his house. 10. The learned Counsel for the appellant also submitted that the lower Court has not considered at all the balance of convenience and irreparable injury in this case. No doubt it is true that the lower Court has dismissed the I.A. of the appellant only on the point of prima facie case. It has not discussed the question of irreparable loss or balance of convenience in ....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 184
... ... ... ... ..... acceptance of the premium from any date other than the annual renewal date, all that it could do was to extend the time for making payment of the premium. Therefore, the contention advanced on behalf of the Corporation that it was accepted only with effect from October 27, 1989, cannot stand scrutiny. If this position is correct, then it must be held that on the date when the petitioner's husband died there was a valid policy in force. If that is so, the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs sought for. The petition is....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 183
... ... ... ... ..... , the above observations were made with reference to the facts before him. However, we are of the view that the learned judge was right in observing that countermanding of a cheque by a stop memo hardly affects the rights of the complainant to initiate proceedings under the Act. It is not necessary for us to consider the effect of the other observations made by the learned single judge in the above-quoted passage on the facts before us. 14. In the complaint filed before the court below the complainant had specifically stat....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 182
... ... ... ... ..... may get relief under section 3(2) or 3(3) without approaching the Tribunal. It enables the Custodian himself to exclude the lands where it is due. It only provides an alternate forum for providing speedy relief to an owner by excluding the lands from the vesting even at the threshold This apparently is the reason why a very short period of terms was provided for making an application under those Rules namely on or before 25 August 1974. Failure to apply under those Rules cannot therefore deprive the owner of the benefit of....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 181
... ... ... ... ..... -74, 1974-75 and 1977-78. the assessment orders for each of these assessment years are long prior to 1st June, 1988. The order of the CIT(A) in respect of these assessment years are of 1981, while the orders under s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 are of 1982. Hence, the ratio of our judgment dt. 15th June, 1992 in IT Appln. No. 557 of 1991 in the case of CIT vs. Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. Since reported at (1992) 107 CTR (Bom) 50 directly applies to the point at issue. The answer to the question being obvious, no useful purpose w....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 180
... ... ... ... ..... will have to be limited to the amount which was communicated in the Corrigendum given to the appellants during the hearing on 24.10.1988. We also make it clear, in view of the submissions of Shri Gujral during the hearing, that it is not permissible to confirm a demand for an amount higher than the one indicated in the show cause notice. In this case, the amount will have to be limited to what was communicated on 24.10.1988. 41. In deciding these appeals, we have seen all the case law that was cited before us and do not co....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 179
... ... ... ... ..... lume as well as nature of suppressions, we feel that no exception could be taken to the orders of the Joint Commissioner under challenge before us in restoring the rate of penalty levied by the assessing authority and that the plea of the assessee that the revisional authority could not have interfered with the exercise of discretion by the appellate authority is far-fetched and cannot have our approval, at any rate in the cases before us. In view of our conclusion that the appellate authority failed to judiciously exercis....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 178
... ... ... ... ..... n the decision reported in Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer 1960 11 STC 827 has held that in order to claim the benefit of exemption the freight should (i) have been specified and charged for by the dealer separately and (ii) the same should not have been included in the prices of the goods sold. In the case before us, the second condition as stated above has not been complied with, which is one of the important conditions, which also finds a place under section 2(h) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 177
... ... ... ... ..... The order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal therefore, is quashed and the matter is remanded back to the assessing authority to determine the factual position of the case and pass fresh order in accordance with the direction given above. Regarding the levy of penalty the appellate authority has already held that there was no mens rea on the part of the assessee and as such the penalty was set aside. I am also of the view that it is also not a fit case for levy of penalty since the transactions were duly recorded in the book....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 176
... ... ... ... ..... hority. The order of the first appellate authority insofar as the leviability of the penalty has become final and therefore we proceed as if this is a case where penalty could have been levied. That position is not disputed before us. The short question, as already noted above, is the question pertaining to the quantum of penalty. The first appellate authority has taken into consideration all relevant factors and thought it fit to exercise its appellate power, while the original authority has not stated in the order as to ....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 175
... ... ... ... ..... rged from the customer. There is no occasion to require the dealer to pay tax on an amount which is not charged from the customer as sale price, while replacing the tyre by way of exchange. No deduction is made from any sales tax charged on the entire sale price of the initial transaction. Therefore, the first appellate authority and the Tribunal were justified in holding that the dealer was not required to pay any extra tax in addition to what has been charged on the price of the replaced tyres. A similar view was taken b....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 174
... ... ... ... ..... y the Commissioner. Even if the instructions are opposed to the plain language of the statutory provision, still the instructions are binding on the subordinate authorities in view of section 3-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. 11.. In K.P. Varghese v. Income-tax Officer 1981 131 ITR 597 (SC) at page 613 AIR 1981 SC 1922, at page 1933, while considering a similar provision under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Supreme Court held that the Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes are binding on all ....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 173
... ... ... ... ..... in Kishindas Agencies v. State of Mysore 1974 33 STC 65 at page 67 is entirely based on the language of the then entry No. 72 of the Second Schedule to the Act read with section 5 as it then stood. To exhaust the citation made before us we have to refer to another decision of this Court reported in Khoday Distilleries (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes 1991 82 STC 251. It was held therein that a component part need not be visibly identifiable in an end-product and that molasses used in the manufacture of an ethy....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 172
... ... ... ... ..... e force of defeating the object of the statute, cannot be considered to be either reasonable or justifiable. The requirement relating to the monetary limit in respect of more than one transaction for an individual C form in our view would at the most be a directory requirement and cannot be construed to be a mandatory one so as to undermine the very efficacy or validity of the C forms themselves warranting their rejection. Consequently, we are of the view that the reasons which weighed with the authorities below to reject ....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 171
... ... ... ... ..... e petitioner alone is discriminatory and cannot be supported. There is also no warrant in law in requiring the petitioner alone to obtain delivery note on each occasion for movement of goods across the check-posts. 6.. Counsel for the respondent submitted that this Court has already upheld the validity of section 29A(2B) authorising advance collection of tax. That decision is reported in Dunlop India Ltd. v. Officer-in-charge of Sales Tax Check Post, Walayar 1992 87 STC 15. I am not concerned with the validity or otherwise....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 170
... ... ... ... ..... nganathan v. Government of Madras). Following that principle, the correct interpretation will be that cashewnut seed is not covered by either the first part or the inclusive part of the Notification No. 2252F.T. dated June 9, 1969. In the result, the application succeeds. The seizures dated November 27, 1989 as well as on May 17, 1992, are quashed. The amount of penalty of Rs. 25,300 already deposited shall be refunded to applicant No. 1, Sk. Mekail. Respondent No. 4, Commercial Tax Officer, Midnapur Charge, is directed to....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 169
... ... ... ... ..... hancement. We are afraid we can countenance such a plea in the teeth of a well-considered decision of a Division Bench of this Court reported in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Panayappan Leather Industries 1981 47 STC 88, wherein it has been held very clearly that on the language contained in section 36(3)(a)(i) of the Act, the power to enhance the assessment is vested in the Tribunal itself, and that the procedure of filing an enhancement petition is merely by way of putting the assessee on notice that in the ....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 168
... ... ... ... ..... are there to carry out the purposes of the said statutory provision and not to inhibit, restrict or circumscribe it. The main section cannot be allowed to become cribbed and cabined by the rules to the extent that it almost turns sterile. If, because of its inadequacy or for any other reason, a rule stands in the way of implementation of, or carrying out the purposes of, a specific statutory provision in a particular case or class of cases, it should be treated as inoperative in so far as that case or that class of cases i....... + More
-
1992 (6) TMI 167
... ... ... ... ..... tries Commission, to entitle it to the exemption. In view of the finding definitely entered by the Appellate Tribunal that the institution which manufactured the soap in question was one recognised by the Khadi and Village Industries Commission, there can be no doubt that the goods are eligible for exemption under the notification in question. 2.. The Government Pleader faintly argued that the recognition of the institution was only for the year ending March 31, 1984 and that it did not enure for the years with which we ar....... + More
