|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 500 Records
-
2001 (11) TMI 1019 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the expression ‘entire consideration’ occurring in cl. 3 of the agreement meant only the consideration relating to completed pictures and excluding the part payments received in respect of ongoing pictures ? 2. Without prejudice to the answer to the above question, whether the Tribunal was right in further holding that the term ‘gross receipts’ occurring in the same clause did not mean the gross realisation of the firm during the year but only the realisation attributable to the completed pictures ignoring the part receipts for ongoing pictures ? 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that it could not be said that on the basis of the method of accounting followed by the assessee the income of the assessee could not be properly deduced and a different basis had to be evolved by the ITO ?" against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1018 - ITAT RAJKOT
... ...
... ... ..... we are of the opinion that the appeals of the assessee deserve to be allowed with cost. The cost is quantified at ₹ 2,500 per appeal of the assessee. 30. In the result, ITA No. 40(RJT.)/1999 allowed with cost ₹ 2,500 ITA No. 41(RJT.)/1999 allowed with cost ₹ 2,500 ITA No. 42(RJT.)/1999 allowed with cost ₹ 2,500 ITA No. 168(RJT.)/1999 dismissed without any cost ITA No. 169(RJT.)/1999 dismissed without any cost ITA No. 170(RJT.)/1999 dismissed without any cost ITA Nos. 171 to 173(RJT.)/1999 dismissed without cost ITA No. 43(RJT.)/1999 assessee’s appeal allowed with cost ₹ 2,500 ITA No. 44(RJT.)/1999 assessee’s appeal allowed with cost ₹ 2,500 ITA No. 45(RJT.)/1999 assessee’s appeal allowed with cost ₹ 2,500 The revenue is directed to deposit the cost with the Registry of the Tribunal within two months from the receipt of the Tribunal order. On receipt of the cost, the Assistant Registrar shall pay it to the assessees.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1017 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... earned single Judge as the same was taken under the impression that a decision to order inquiry into the offence itself would prima facie amount to holding him, if not guilty, very near to a finding of his guilt. We have pointed out earlier that the purpose of conducting preliminary inquiry is not for that purpose at all. The would be accused is not necessary for the court to decide the question of expediency in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be held. We have come across decisions of some other High Courts which held the view that the persons against whom proceedings were instituted have no such right to participate in the preliminary inquiry. vide M. Muthuswamy vs. Special Police Establishment (AIR 1985 Criminal Law Journal 420) . We therefore agree with the impugned judgment that appellant cannot complain that he was not heard during the preliminary inquiry conducted by the reference court under Section 340 of the Code. In the result we dismiss this appeal.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1016 - HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
... ...
... ... ..... aving heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the view expressed earlier by the Tribunal that if the margin between the value as given by the assessee and the Departmental valuer is less than 10 per cent, then this difference is liable to be ignored, has some merit. As a matter of fact, the Tribunal constituted under the Act, has been giving relief in this regard. This aspect of the matter somehow or the other escaped the notice of the CIT, Amritsar. Therefore, the matter is remanded to the said officer who would take notice of the earlier practice which was being enforced by the Tribunal. While doing so, the CIT would also take notice of the decision given by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pratapsingh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh & Deepak Kumar (1993) 200 ITR 788(Raj). Other pleas raised and as noticed in this order be also taken note of. The parties to appear before the CIT, Jammu, on 27th Dec., 2001. 4. Disposed of accordingly.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1015 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... um and postal charges, the right accrued to the landlord to get possession on this ground is defeated. Even after passing of the eviction order a further right is conferred upon tenant in terms of clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 11. It is only such tenant who defaults to pay the rent at all the three relevant times that the law requires him to be dispossessed. In the instant case the respondents-tenants are proved to have failed to pay the arrears of rent at all the three relevant times. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the tenants were not entitled to any discretionary relief under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Without referring to the facts of the case the High Court has passed the impugned order which is not sustainable. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, the appeals are allowed by setting aside the order impugned and upholding the order passed by the appellate and revisional authority against the respondents-tenants. No costs.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1014 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... Basic Rent at a rate which was far below the cost of construction; (iv)the assessee’s case is clearly hit by the provisions of section 11(4A); (v)a large portion of the assessee’s income was unreasonably treated to be "unsecured Loans" resulting into huge unutilised funds with the assessee for which neither any concrete plan to "accumulate" was made nor the required intimation for the same was given to the Assessing Officer; and (vi)the accounts of the assessee have been drawn in such a manner that it is not possible to segregate the expenditure incurred by the assessee for earning income; expenditure incurred by the assessee on Establishment and expenditure on various activities of The Centre. For these reasons we hold that for these assessment years the assessee is not entitled to exemption under section 11 of the Act and accordingly we uphold the orders of the authorities below for both assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91 in this respect.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1013 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... a consequence, so would be the case with Satyanarayana Raos case (supra). 15. Notwithstanding our aforesaid conclusion, it would be in the interest of the Administration to have a channel of promotion for every service, so as to avoid stagnation at a particular level, subject however to the condition that the incumbents of a service are otherwise qualified to shoulder the responsibilities of the higher promotional post. The appropriate authority of the Government, therefore, should bear this in mind and consider the feasibility and desirability of continuing the supernumerary posts already created in the Boilers and Factories Department on a permanent basis, so that the employees from the lower echelon in the said Department have a promotional channel or, to make suitable promotional avenue at least upto some level, so that there would not be any discontentment amongst the employees in the concerned Department. The appeals are without any merit and are accordingly dismissed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1012 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... e entire amounts of personal penalties imposed on both the Appellants. The Commissioner (Appeals) passed the final order dismissing the appeals for non-compliance with the requirement of predeposit as directed by him. Hence, this appeal by the Company. 3. We note on hearing both sides, that the Appellants have paid entire duty amount and they have also deposited further sum of ₹ 60,000/- penalty and the waiver is sought only for the predeposit of balance amount of penalty on the Company. In view of the above and considering that no decision on the merits of the matter has been passed by the Lower Appellate Authority, we accept predeposit of ₹ 60,000/- as sufficient for the purpose of the Stay Application, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision. On the merits of the case after extending a reasonable (SIC) to the Appellants of being heard and explaining its case. 4. The appeal is, thus, allowed by remand.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1011 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... creates suspicious about execution of the will. The execution of the will having been proved by the attesting witness, on the facts and circumstances noticed above, no presumption could be drawn against the defendants for not having filed other admitted documents of Indira Bai for purpose of comparing her signatures on the will. The plaintiff was disputing the will. She did not take any steps for the production of the documents containing the admitted signatures of Indira Bai. In respect of documents produced by her the High Court observed that the evidence was not sufficient to show that the signatures contained in those documents were those of Indira Bai. The trial court had rightly relied upon the testimony of DW2. The finding of the High Court that the will of Indira Bai had not been proved cannot be sustained. For the aforesaid reasons, we set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and restore that of the trial court. The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1010 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ay not condoned. The Civil Appeal is dismissed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1009 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... RDER Delay condoned. The civil appeal is dismissed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1008 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... asted we direct the Commissioner to expedite the proceedings and dispose of the claim without any further delay. Before disposing of this appeal we deem it necessary to make one more direction which, in our opinion, is required for completion of the even course of justice. The Bar Council of the State of Haryana should hold an inquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner against the advocate Rajpal Panwar of Jagadhri as to whether he had played a chicanery to defraud the petitioner by obtaining his thumb impression and paying ₹ 9,500/-. We restrain ourselves from making any observation on the merits of the allegations made against the aforesaid advocate. We direct the Registry of this Court to forward a copy of this judgment to the Secretary of the Bar Council of the Haryana. This is to enable the said Bar Council to adopt such steps as they deem fit and necessary for disposal of the disciplinary proceedings as against the said Rajpal Panwar, Advocate, Jagadhri.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1007 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... Variava, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed
-
2001 (11) TMI 1006 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... ld till the final decision of this Tribunal on the issue of constitutional validity of section 39A and sub-section (3) of section 39 of the Act, 1994. In our opinion, the contention of the learned State Representative cannot be accepted inasmuch as, the issue in controversy is, whether the proceeding for cancellation of registration certificate can be initiated under sub-section (11) of section 26 of the Act, 1994 even if a dealer has not been assessed to tax. This disputed issue cannot impliedly be redundant even after the constitutional validity of section 39A and sub-section (3) of section 39 is favourably decided. 15.. The application, therefore, is allowed. The impugned notice dated October 9, 2001 issued by the respondent No. 4 is hereby set aside. No further steps to be taken pursuant to the said impugned notice accordingly. The prayer for issuing declaration form is disallowed since it was not pressed at the time of hearing. No order as to costs. Application allowed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1005 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... G.O. Ms. No. 739 dated October 17, 2000 as ultra vires to the extent of withdrawing the benefits, which are available under G.O. Ms. No. 187 dated April 3, 2000 retrospectively. No costs. 9.. It is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that since the assessing authority has denied the benefits in the light of the subsequent G.O. issued, which are available to the petitioner pursuant to G.O. Ms. No. 187 and completed the assessment for the year 20002001, the assessing authority may be directed to reassess and grant the benefits for the interregnum period, i.e., from April 3, 2000 to October 31, 2000. 10.. Accepting the above submission, we direct the assessing authority to reassess and determine the tax liability for the assessment year 2000-2001 while giving benefit to the petitioner for the interregnum period from April 3, 2000 to October 31, 2000 in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 187 dated April 3, 2000. 11.. That Rule nisi has been made absolute as above. Writ petition allowed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1004 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ard. The question of remission was considered by the assessing authority. The dealer claimed remission to the tune of Rs. 6,25,17,375 but the assessing authority granted remission only in respect of Rs. 5,25,91,650. Thus, the question of granting of remission was finally decided by the assessing authority. Part of claim of remission was impliedly rejected by the assessing authority, which could be corrected only in appeal before the appellate authority. It may be pointed out that the Tribunal has itself not granted remission. It has simply held that the assessee was entitled to remission and directed the assessing authority to pass fresh order granting remission. Therefore, there is no error of law in the order passed by the Tribunal. 10.. Having carefully considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist and material on record, I am of the view that the present revision is devoid of any merit. Therefore, it is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1003 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... and false premise that the amount of duty drawback is goods, and such alleged goods even though they are not the subject-matter of sale, form part of the taxable turnover, would result in needless and wholly unjustified harassment of exporters who are being encouraged to maximise their exports by granting to them, by way of incentive, drawback of the customs duty paid by them. When there is no transaction of sale and the thing sought to be regarded as goods is in fact and in law not goods, the proceedings initiated is without jurisdiction. 7.. We, therefore, consider it appropriate to put an end to this at the inception, even though this Court will not normally interfere with proceedings under the Act at the stage of a pre-assessment notice. Having regard to the special facts of this case, the exercise of our extraordinary power is warranted. 8.. The pre-assessment notice is quashed and the order of the Tribunal set aside. The writ petition is allowed. Writ petition allowed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1002 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... concerned, they are inter-State sales falling within section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, and there is no dispute about the same by the department also. The question is with regard to second transaction between the assessee and the customer in Kerala, which gives rise to the liability for the disputed tax. We feel, as already observed by us above, there are two transactions, one is the inter-State purchase by the assessee, and the other is the delivery of goods under the hire-purchase agreement by the assessee to the customer in Kerala, which is the deemed sale under explanation (3) to section 2(xxi) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. Therefore the decisions referred to above do not affect the assessee s liability for tax in respect of the hire-purchase transaction, which is independent of the inter-State purchase by the assessee. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the orders of the Tribunal. We accordingly dismiss the tax revision cases. Petitions dismissed.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1001 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... spondent should see that expeditious steps are taken for obvious reasons for enforcement of the same. Facts of this case prima facie, show that there has been lethargy on the part of the departmental officers. At least, till such time the check-posts exist and the present taxation system is in vogue, it has to be ensured that the system as envisaged works. 11.. In view of the statutory remedy available, in this original petition, I decline to grant relief to the petitioner. The revision, if filed within one month should be entertained as filed within time. I also make it clear that enforcement of penalty proceedings will stand suspended for a period of one month and it will be appropriate for the revisional authority to examine the applications for interlocutory orders as and when that are made in the revisional proceedings. The original petition is closed with the above observation. Order on C.M.P. No. 53791 of 2001 in O.P. No. 32991 of 2001(C) closed. Petition disposed of.
-
2001 (11) TMI 1000 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... atex exempt in the hands of the assessee. Therefore there is no scope for independent levy of tax on rubber cess, as the same is only a component of the taxable turnover. 8.. The assessee has a case that it is entitled to sales tax exemption in terms of certificate of exemption obtained from the Industries Department and produced as annexure I in the tax revision cases. We feel that it has no relevance because the product, namely, centrifuged latex, is taxable at last purchase point and the assessee is granted exemption on the basis of form No. 25 obtained and produced by it from the purchasers. So far as the field latex is concerned, the assessee has claimed exemption under two notifications discussed above, and we have held that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of the said notifications. Therefore there is no scope to consider the claim of exemption on the basis of certificate produced by the assessee. The tax revision cases are allowed to the extent indicated above.
........
|
