|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 339 Records
-
1997 (10) TMI 338
Whether “dhoop” or “dhoop-batti” fell within the description of “perfume” thereunder?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. We are in no doubt whatever that the word “perfumery” in the said entry No. 16 draws colour from the words “cosmetics” and “toilet goods” therein and that, so read, the word “perfumery” in the said entry No. 16 can only refer to such articles of perfumery as are used, as cosmetics and toilet goods are, upon the person. The word “perfumery” in the context in which it is used has, therefore, no application to “dhoop” and “agarbatti”
-
1997 (10) TMI 327
Winding up - Statement of affairs to be made to Official Liquidator ... ... ... ... ..... ute had arisen between P.R. Mehta and other Directors on account of non- payment of his remuneration. The winding up petition was also filed by Shri P.R. Mehta. Thereafter, when the record was made available to them for inspection by the office of the Official Liquidator they submitted the statement. From the materials and evidence on record, thus, it is made out that there was reasonable and sufficient cause for them in not filing the statement. It further transpires that the company at its initial stage failed to operate and after few months of its coming into operation, it was closed down and its entire assets were taken in possession by the Punjab National Bank who had advanced loans to the company under hypothecation. 6. Thus, taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, no case for punishing non-applicants under sub-section (5) of section 454 is made out. The application is, therefore, dismissed and non-applicants are hereby discharged. SCL q MARCH 5, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 326
Transfer of shares - Power to refuse registration ... ... ... ... ..... contentions for injunction to restrain defendant No. 1 company from registering the transfer of shares. 50. Before parting with the matter, this Court would like to place on record the valuable assistance rendered by Mr. S.B. Vakil for the appellant as well as Mr. Shelat for the respondent on interesting questions of law which are bound to assume much more importance in the days to come. Order 51. In the result, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to costs. 52. As the appeal is dismissed, the stay application is also dismissed. ad interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. At this stage, Mr. Vakil, the learned counsel for the appellant prays that the ad interim relief granted earlier, may be continued for six weeks to enable the appellant to carry the matter in appeal. In the facts and circumstances of the case, ad interim relief granted earlier shall continue till 21-11-1997.
-
1997 (10) TMI 324
Winding up - Inability to pay debt, Suspension of legal proceedings, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... rom the appellant without seeking the consent of the BIFR in this behalf. But, in this case, the proposition of law laid down in the case of Corromandal Pharmaceuticals ( supra), has been reiterated that such amounts like sales tax, etc., which the sick industrial company is enabled to collect after the date of sanctioned scheme legitimately belonging to the revenue cannot and could not have been intended to be covered within section 22. 10. The position of law emerges from the aforementioned authorities, in short, is that in case a sick company incurs debt subsequent to the scheme framed by BIFR for rehabilitation, no permission is required by BIFR for taking action against the debtor company including the application for winding up. 11. For the foregoing reasons, in the winding up case, proceedings cannot be stayed because debts had been incurred by the respondent-company subsequent to the scheme framed by BIFR for rehabilitation of the respondent-company. SCL q JULY 5,1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 323
Procedure and powers of Tribunals ... ... ... ... ..... one between the parties, and if the defendant was to show that his defence is handicapped by any defect in the application, then the proper course will be to allow the applicant to cure the defect to enable the defendant to properly defend the case. In the present case the complaint of the petitioner is that translated copies of Telugu documents were not filed along with the application. The counter affidavit itself states that at the time of trial the translated copies will be furnished. The power to condone the defect can be exercised by the Tribunal to seeing that the principles of natural justice are followed in the application. Since the Tribunal has followed its own procedure under such guiding principles, I am sure that it will not warrant any interference by this Court, as justice is not only done, but appears to have been done. 3. In the circumstances, I see no reason to entertain the Civil Revision Petition. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs. SCL q MARCH 5, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 322
Deficiency in service -Meaning of ... ... ... ... ..... plicant/complain- ant can maintain complaint and the finding of the District Forum is quite in order which needs hardly any interference. 8. The next question which requires consideration is whether the compen- sation of Rs. 2,000 awarded by the District Forum is excessive. It is admitted case of the parties that equity shares were purchased for Rs. 4,000 and since the shares were not allotted and the money has been returned to the complainant, in our opinion, it would be just and equitable if the amount of compensation of Rs. 2,000 awarded by District Forum, which seems to be on excessive side is reduced to Rs. 1,000. 9. In the light of what is discussed above, the appeal of the appellant State Bank of India partly succeeds and that accordingly the appellant-State Bank of India shall pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 1,000 instead of Rs. 2,000 as compensation alongwith costs of Rs. 1,000. The order of the District Forum stands modified accordingly. SCL q APRIL 20, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 321
Whether mere presentation of an irrevocable letter of credit covering the value of requirement of raw materials is sufficient for registering the indent?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. Mere production of the letter of credit will not be sufficient to determine the price ruling on the date. It must be given by an import licence holder eligible to get the supplies under the scheme. In this case, we have seen that the importer will not fall under the category of 'import licence holder eligible to get supplies under the scheme' as on the date when the letter of credit was presented, the licence/release order was defective. Therefore, we cannot agree with Mr. Parekh that the importer having produced the letter of credit well before 25-8-1983, the price payable for the supplies must be the pre-revised one.
The High Court has not decided but has left open the question relating to the right of the appellant to fix the price from time to time even though that was the main issue raised in the writ petition before the High Court. As we are not in agreement with the view expressed by the High Court on other issues, it is now necessary for the High Court to consider the issue relating to the right of the appellant to fix the price from time to time.
It is open to the appellant to raise the question of unjust enrichment when the matter is taken up by the High Court pursuant to this remit order. The parties can place before the High Court necessary material in support of their respective contentions on the issue of unjust enrichment.
-
1997 (10) TMI 320
Whether the impugned legislation Nagaland Forest Products Ltd. (Acquisition of Shares) Ordinance, 1981, and the Nagaland Forest Products Ltd. (Acquisition of Shares) Act, 1982 attempts/authorises the taking over of the management/control of the plywood industry or it only enables the State Government to acquire the assets (shares) of the company?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The impugned legislation was not enacted for taking over management or control of any industrial undertaking by the State Government. In pith and substance, it was enacted to acquire the scheduled undertakings. If an attempt was made to take over management or control of any industrial undertaking in a declared industry indisputably the bar of section 20 would inhibit exercise of such executive power.
-
1997 (10) TMI 319
Share certificates Limitation period for issuance of ... ... ... ... ..... section 113(2) and that prima facie the petitioner fell within the purview of officers in default as defined in section 5 read with section 2 of the Act. The impugned order is, therefore, neither invalid in law nor required to be set aside in revisionery powers of this Court. 12. However, taking note of the nature of dispute, I am of the opinion that the grievance of respondent No. 1 seems to be relating to the payment of the amount of interest due to him in respect of the Debentures sought to be registered by transfer in his name. Such a petty dispute should not normally, keep either the parties or the Criminal Court busy in litigation for litigants sake. 13. Therefore, this petition is dismissed with a direction to the learned Magistrate that, if the petitioners make payment of the interest due on the debentures, transferred in his name, within a period of three months, he may pass orders under section 258 of the Code bringing the litigation to a halt. SCL q JANUARY 5, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 318
Consumer, Jurisdiction of the district forum ... ... ... ... ..... priate cases by the District Consumer Forums and the State Commis-sions. A consumer claiming compensation cannot be non-suited by the District Consumer Forum by styling the dispute as a commercial transac-tion. So far as the plea regarding lack of territorial jurisdiction is con-cerned, it has no basis as the learned District Consumer Forum, Hissar, was certainly competent to adjudicate the claims once it is established that the shares were purchased and money was paid at Hissar. Even if it is assumed that complaints could be filed at other places like Faridabad and Delhi, etc. that would not exclude the jurisdiction of the Hissar Consumer Forum. 6 Under the circumstances, we do not find any legal infirmity in the decision of the learned District Consumer Forum allowing the complaints. Since the respondents have unnecessarily been dragged into litigation, they shall also be entitled to costs of these proceedings which are quantified at Rs. 500 in each case. SCL q MAY 20, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 316
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... t is also noteworthy that none of the shareholders of the petitioner-company has filed any objection with regard to the ratio of exchange or to the scheme of amalgamation in the meetings duly held, convened pursuant to the directions of this Court. Accordingly, the contention of the Central Government fails. It is on record that all the statutory formalities have been complied with. Even the Calcutta High Court has already sanctioned the present scheme of amalgamation and the exchange ratio as proposed in the petition filed before it of the transferor-company. Mention may also be made to the fact that the Central Government did not raise any objection to the sanction of the scheme of amalgamation including the exchange ratio before the Calcutta High Court. 22. Accordingly, in my considered view, the scheme, if approved, will be beneficial for all concerned and as such the scheme approved by the members stands confirmed. No order as to cost. Scheme approved. SCL q JUNE 5, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 315
Winding up - Liability for fraudulent conduct of business ... ... ... ... ..... 31-3-1981. No depreciation has been shown till the date it was sold. The furniture and other assets were sold in the year 1981 after taking all care. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the non-petitioners acted dishonestly or abstained from acting in conformity with their plain duties. The burden to prove the charge/liability against the Ex-Directors was of the applicant. Unless a Director has done some-thing wrongly by misapplying or retaining in his own hands any money of the company or the Director has done something by which the company rsquo s properties had been wasted resulting in actual loss to the company, there cannot be any misfeasance or breach of trust. After going through the entire material on record, I am satisfied that no case of misfeasance or breach of trust is made out against any of the non-petitioners. 8. Consequently, the application filed by the Official Liquidator deserves to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. SCL q NOVEMBER 20, 1998
-
1997 (10) TMI 291
Exim Policy - Penalty - Demand - Show Cause Notice ... ... ... ... ..... of State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and Another reported in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 483 (S.C.) AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1321 had held as under ldquo The entire Community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A disregard for the interest of the Community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the Community in the system to administer justice in an even handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissible eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest. rdquo 37. emsp In view of the above discussions, we do not find any merit in these appeals. The appeals are dismissed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 283
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... being allowed on merits the question whether the Revenue was justified in reopening, the case under proviso to Section 11A of the Act is rendered academic and is not necessary to be decided. rdquo In this case, we do not find any lsquo product mark rsquo or the brand name by which the product in question could be identified if asked for. The name of the product was generic which was specified in the Indian Pharmacopoeia. 10. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we do not agree with the view taken by the ld. Collector, Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) in this case. As a result, the appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The refund, if any, will however, be subject to law relating to unjust enrichment in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. U.O.I. reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) and other subsequent decisions on the subject of unjust enrichment. With these observations, the appeal is allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 282
Classification - Demand - Limitation - Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... . Nos. 3 to 7 in the appeal memo of the Revenue have been issued in RT 12 Returns. This matter also would have to be examined. In case no show cause notices were issued and the assessment was not provisional then the demands based on RT 12 Returns are not sustainable. 6. emsp In regard to the Revenue Appeal the ld. DR submits that the entire demand could not be set aside on the ground that Assistant Collector has no jurisdiction. His jurisdiction certainly was in regard to the period of six months and the demand only beyond six months could be set aside. The ld. DR submits that the period will have to be computed from the relevant date of submission of RT 12 Returns. We agree that only the period beyond six months was to hit by time bar, and the exact period would be computed by the Adjudicating authority in a de novo proceedings. 7. emsp In view of this both appeals are remanded to the Assistant Collector for de novo decision in the light of observations made in this appeal.
-
1997 (10) TMI 275
Classification - Control system for DG Synchronisation ... ... ... ... ..... which covers Radar Equipments. The equipment as described by the respondents is for measuring of pressure and voltage. It is not clearly mentioned as to how the ld. Lower Authority has pitched on the classification under 85.26. It is specifically for Radar apparatus, radio navigational aid apparatus and radio remote control apparatus. The details of the apparatus will have to be gone into afresh before coming to any conclusion in this regard. The said details are not found either in the Grounds of appeal or in the order of the ld. Lower authority. These being complex equipments, the ld. Lower authority should have called for the write-up in respect of each of the equipments before arriving at his conclusions. We are of the view that the examination of the issue is not done in depth and we therefore set aside the classification of the same and remand the matter to the ld. original authority for de novo consideration. 11. emsp The appeal is therefore decided in the above terms.
-
1997 (10) TMI 272
Modvat - Interpretation of statutes - Appeal - Hearing before Tribunal - Modvat - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... rance of inputs for home consumption. rdquo This view does not flow from the observations extracted above. 13. emsp In the light of our above discussions and in view of the apparent ambiguity in the majority decision relied upon by the appellants, we agree with the view as taken by the Tribunal in the cases of (1) emsp Ponds India Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1991 (56) E.L.T. 574 (Tribunal), (2) emsp Collector of Central Excise, Madras v. Becon Weir Ltd. - 1994 (72) E.L.T. 657 (Tribunal) and (3) emsp Collector of Central Excise, Madras v. Chennai Bottling Company Ltd., Madras - 1996 (83) E.L.T. 355 (Tribunal) 1995 (25) ETR 540 (Tribunal). rdquo 10. emsp Taking all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case into account, we do not find any merit in both these appeals and the same are rejected. However, keeping in view the circumstances of the case, we set aside the amount of penalty of Rs. 1000/- each. Subject to above, both these appeals are otherwise rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
1997 (10) TMI 270
Furagyl suspension containing `Metronidazole Benzoate’ ... ... ... ... ..... on that was used mainly as an ester so that even children can consume the tablet. 3. emsp The matter is not res integra. Under similar circumstances in respect of the same ingredient the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Aaron Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. - 1990 (47) E.L.T. 475 had held that just because an ester is added to the ingredient it does not entitle the department to deny the exemption to the benefit of Notification No. 116/69. The facts in the instant case are similar to the case of Aaron Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). Moreover the Collector (Appeals) in respect of another appeal filed by M/s. Fairdeal Corporation Pvt. Ltd. has held in favour of the assessee in the assessee in the Order No. A-1980/BI-369/82, under similar circumstances. We are therefore of the view that the assessee rsquo s case has to be accepted and the department rsquo s case cannot be accepted. Hence the appeal is disposed of in favour of the assessee.
-
1997 (10) TMI 269
Demand - Limitation - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... paragraph of the said letter. The show cause notice does not in our view even obliquely refer to the ingredients contained in the proviso to Section 11A of the Act. There is no specific allegation of either mis-statement or suppression of fact as has been found by the Judgment of Supreme Court in the case of H.M.M. Ltd. (supra) referred to above. There is absolutely no statement of actions of commissions or omissions so as to attract the various ingredients of the proviso to Section 11A. The impugned order is a quasi-judicial act done by a quasi-judicial authority before any quasi-judicial act affecting any person with civil consequences can take place there must be a specific allegation in the show cause notice. In the absence of the same, no action of this type can be taken. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, with consequential relief if any. In view of the above, we are not going to the merits of the other argument made by Shri D.B. Shroff.
-
1997 (10) TMI 268
... ...
... ... ..... the restriction would only apply in the case of Dross which answers to the hazardous variety. He has pleaded that the Chemical Examiner report says that the dross imported was not of hazardous variety. 3. emsp On a perusal of the Import Policy, it is seen that against description Aluminium Dross at Sl. No. 26204001 in the Appendix to the Import Policy, the import of the Aluminium Dross is shown to be restricted item and it is clearly mentioned that the licence would be required for importation of the same and that the same could be used only for re-processing as per the note given for this heading. The restriction as imposed is unambiguous and the policy clearly envisages that a licence for the importation of the goods in question is required. No licence, in the present case, has been produced. Therefore, I hold that the goods have been rightly ordered to be confiscated and the redemption fine fixed cannot be considered as excessive. 4. emsp The appeal is therefore dismissed.
........
|
