|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 559 Records
-
2004 (10) TMI 581 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the petitioner is disqualified for being a member of the House under paragraph 2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule read with Article 191(2) of the Constitution and consequently the seat held by him in the Bihar Legislative Council had fallen vacant from the said date?
-
2004 (10) TMI 580 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... lar cases, wherein it is ruled that no commission under section 131(d) can be issued for calling report of D.V.O. by Assessing Officer, the impugned orders of Tribunal deciding the issue in favour of assessee does not call for any interference. In other words, it was rightly held that the orders passed by Tribunal in respect of same D.V.O. report for the earlier assessment orders should have been relied upon by Assessing Officer and the CIT (Appeals) to maintain judicial discipline and secondly, in the absence of any extension obtained, the report of D.V.O. beyond the period fixed, could not be relied upon and lastly, in view of recent pronouncement of Supreme Court interpreting powers of Assessing Officer regarding issuance of commission under section 131(d) to D.V.O. the issue must be decided and rightly decided by Tribunal in favour of assessee. 7. In this view of the matter, the appeal does not involve any substantial question of law and hence, it is dismissed in limine.
-
2004 (10) TMI 579 - SUPREME COURT
Whether absorption of about 4,000 employees working on teaching and non-teaching posts in 40 colleges affiliated to various universities which were taken over as constituent colleges in accordance with the provisions of Bihar Universities Act, 1976 valid?
-
2004 (10) TMI 578 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Molasses storage fund collected out of sale proceeds of molasses as per law cannot be included in Income of Assessee - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of ₹ 10,69,542 credited to molasses storage fund out of the sale proceeds of molasses was to be included in the income of the appellant
-
2004 (10) TMI 577 - SUPREME COURT
Effect of dismissal of a complaint filed under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Second complaint dismissed by high Court as mere repetition - Held that:- there is no statutory bar in filing a second complaint on the same facts. In a case where a previous complaint is dismissed without assigning any reason, the Magistrate under Section 204 Cr.P.C. may take cognizance of an offence and issue process if there is sufficient ground for proceeding. But the second complaint on the same facts could be entertained only in exceptional circumstances, namely, where the previous order was passed on an incomplete record or on a misunderstanding of the nature of complaint or it was manifestly absurd, unjust or where new facts which could not, with reasonable diligence, have been brought on record in the previous proceedings have been adduced. The second complaint could be dismissed after a decision has been given against the complainant in previous matter upon a full consideration of his case. Further second complaint on the same facts would be entertained only in exceptional circumstances, namely, where previous order was passed on an incomplete record or on misunderstanding of the complaint or it was manifestly absurd or unjust.
Question is academic as the High Court did not interfere with the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge on the ground that the revision was not maintainable in view of the prescription in Section 397(2) of the Code. Undisputedly, in a given case Section 482 of the Code can be pressed into service. It was held by this Court in Pramatha Nath’s case (1961 (11) TMI 63 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA). Further, in Subramanium’s case (2004 (9) TMI 605 - SUPREME COURT) as noted above, it was observed that issuance of process is a preliminary step in the stage of trial. - As the High Court has not considered the legality of the order directing issuance of process keeping in view the law laid down by this Court, we feel it would be proper to remit the matter to the High Court to record positive findings on the relevant issues. - Decided in favour of appellant.
-
2004 (10) TMI 576 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the High Court was justified in directing eviction?
Entitlement of the tenant to get protection under the Tenants Act which can be more effectively decided in case action in terms of what is required under the Tenants Act is taken by the landlord.
-
2004 (10) TMI 575 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... reason to interfere. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
-
2004 (10) TMI 574 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... , JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2004 (10) TMI 573 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT]
... ...
... ... ..... tilised in a particular way. Applying the test propounded by this court in Hotel Balaji v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1993 88 STC 98 (SC) 1993 3 PHT 44 (SC) 1993 Supp. 4 SCC 536 we hold that clause (ca) of section 15 contains a limited deeming fiction by which tax exemption is given only to the sale of rice by the exporter and not to the sale by the appellant-miller to the exporter. From the above extracted portion of the judgment in Monga Rice Mill v. State of Haryana 2004 135 STC 549 (SC), it is clear that the issue relating to interpretation of section 9(1)(b) of the Haryana Act, as it was obtaining in the year 1982-1983 was not even considered by the Supreme Court. Therefore, that judgment cannot be made basis for sustaining the orders passed by the Assessing Authority, Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Rohtak/Faridabad and the Tribunal. In the result, the questions referred by the Tribunal are answered in favour of the petitioner and against the department.
-
2004 (10) TMI 572 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... merely because it is lawful to do so and whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances. In the present case, the explanation of the dealer has not been disputed that due to the financial crisis, the amount could not be deposited within the specified time, which was subsequently deposited along with the interest. In my opinion, the applicant was able to make out the case of reasonable cause , inasmuch as no case of mala fide intention is made out and accordingly, the penalty is not justified. In the similar circumstances, in the case of Krishna Arhat Kendra v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in 2003 UPTC 522, this court has deleted the penalty. Following the aforesaid decision, the penalty is accordingly deleted. In the result, all the revisions are allowed. Penalty under section 15A(1)(a) of the Act are set aside.
-
2004 (10) TMI 571 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... es, nature of payment made are examined, etc. Learned counsel for the petitioner then placed reliance on two decisions reported in Dimple Overseas v. Collector of Customs 1995 80 ELT 10 (SC) and Kanyakaparameswari Trading Company v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1983 54 STC 135 (AP) and contended that no case for the remand was made out. I have already dealt with this issue supra and negatived the submission. These decisions lay down general principle of law whereas facts of the case in hand make the case distinguishable. In this view of the matter, no reliance can be placed on these decisions. In my view, therefore, the revisionary authority did not commit any mistake/error in remanding the case to assessing officer. Petition is thus found to be totally devoid of any merit. It is dismissed in limine. Let the proceedings be completed by assessing officer within three months. A copy of this order be sent to concerned assessing officer (R-1) by the State counsel as also by Registry.
-
2004 (10) TMI 570 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ndent was at no point of time ascertained and as a matter of fact in a partnership concern it will also not be possible to ascertain the amounts due to him individually from the second respondent. Such a question has already been considered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in K. Srihari Rao and Co. v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Sirpur, Kagaznagar 1990 79 STC 117. Following the same judgment, we are of the view that the sales tax authorities could have not issued the impugned notice and ordered attachment and payment of money that was due to the petitioner on account of the default of a third party. In these circumstances, we allow the writ petition, quash the impugned notice and direct the first respondent to refund the amount to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are at liberty to recover the dues from the defaulting dealer in accordance with law. No costs. That the rule nisi has been made absolute as above.
-
2004 (10) TMI 569 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the extent of cool drinks and ice-creams and it is held that they were not taxable under section 5C of the Act, as they had suffered tax under section 5 of the Act. Another question, which is raised, pertains to the milk purchased from unregistered dealers and sold after conversion into curd. This question has already been decided by this court in Krishna Enterprises v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1990 10 APSTJ 79, and controversy stands covered by this judgment. The court found that In this case the petitioner purchases milk. It is admitted that the milk is taxable as general goods. It is also admitted that the person from whom the petitioner purchases milk was not a registered dealer and no tax was paid by him. In such circumstances he is liable to pay the tax and it is immaterial whether he supplies to his customers milk as such or he converts milk into curd and then supplies the same to his customers. The special appeals are accordingly allowed in part. No order as to costs.
-
2004 (10) TMI 568 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ation as to why they should not be asked to pay interest also. Moreover, there is no dispute regarding the amount of refund for the next years, as it finds mention in the orders of the authorities itself. In this view of the matter the respondents are directed to pay the amount of interest to be calculated from the date of the order of refund/adjustment passed by the authorities in terms of Section 29 (2) of the Act within 30 days from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before respondent no.1. Since the amount of refund as also the interest has been unnecessarily withheld by the respondents and the principal amount was only refunded, when the petitioner approached this Court by means of the present writ petition, the respondents have also exposed themselves with the liability for payment of exemplary cost, which we assess at Rs. 10,000/- as cost shall also be paid along with the interest within the same period. The writ petition succeeds and is allowed in part.
-
2004 (10) TMI 567 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... scope of its being treated as an actionable claim. DEPB for all practical purposes represents merchandise and is treated and dealt with as such in the commercial world. DEPB is neither a chose-in-action nor an actionable claim. It has a value of its own. It is by itself property and it is for this reason that it is freely bought and sold in the market. For all purposes and intents, it is goods. Therefore it can be subject to tax. . . . . The term 39 property 39 in jurisprudence has a very wide connotation, it includes all property whether corporeal or incorporeal. It is comprehensive enough to take in all types of proprietary rights. According to us, the definition of goods under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 is also in conformity with the decision in the above cases referred to by the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court. Hence, we are of the view that they are liable to be so assessed under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Sales tax revision is dismissed.
-
2004 (10) TMI 566 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... V. 22.. In view of aforesaid discussion, once we hold that both the items/commodities which are sold in the market by and under the trade name Fevicol MR , i.e. (synthetic gum) and Fevicryl acrylic colours , i.e. (colours used for painting, drawing on paper and cloth) are stationery articles and are liable to be taxed in specific entry 21 of Part IV then it is not necessary to consider whether residuary entry is attracted or not? Indeed, it is not so attracted and gets excluded once the commodity is found to fall in specific entry. 23.. In view of foregoing discussion, we answer the question against the State/Revenue and in favour of dealer. In other words, we answer the reference by holding that Tribunal was justified in holding that Fevicol MR and Fevicryl acrylic colours are items of stationery and as such are taxable under entry 21 of Part IV of Schedule II of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (since repealed) No costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
2004 (10) TMI 565 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t available with the department and they are not in a position to produce those records or supply the records to the appellant. They have their own explanation to offer for not being able to produce the record and the explanation is that the record was misplaced in shifting of the offices. Whatever the reasons, the fact remains that the assessments were reviewed on the basis of the evidence collected from third party, which was not made available to the appellant/assessee. For these reasons, the reassessments cannot survive. The orders passed revising the assessments are quashed and the special appeals are allowed. 2.. The learned Government Pleader submits that the matter be remanded. We do not understand what purpose it will serve to remand the case, if High Court was not able to make the department search the record and produce before it, how can an assessing officer be able to procure such a record. For these reasons, this request is also not considered. Appeals allowed.
-
2004 (10) TMI 564 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... der to discern the intention of the parties, it is not necessary to have the contract in writing. The intention can be gathered even from correspondence exchanged inter se parties which results in creation of concluded contract. In this case, the three invoices were made basis for interpreting the nature of contract. These three invoices did constitute the valid contract inter se parties and contained all necessary conditions for interpreting the nature of contract for deciding the question of taxability. Indeed, it was so made basis by the Tribunal for determining the question referred. 19.. In view of foregoing discussion, we answer the question referred to us against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. In other words, we hold that Tribunal was right in holding that the transaction of supply, erection, commissioning and trial production undertaken by the dealer was a composite works contract but not a sale as chattel. No costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
2004 (10) TMI 563 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y. On the other hand, the language and the content of proviso (a) of section 27(8), being more or less similar to the substantive provisions of the sub-section do not bestow any separate and independent identity on the proviso except to create denture for superficial bites. Similarly, the aforesaid principles of interpretation would also not apply for elucidating and interpreting the proviso in question and thus they do not seem to help the appellant in any manner. 13.. Hence, on a careful consideration of the materials on record and in the premises of aforesaid discussion on law, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order which rather appears to be the only correct interpretation of proviso (a) of sub-section (8) of section 27 and, therefore, we hold that the impugned notifications issued under sub-section (9) would also cover the categories of cases as contained in the proviso. Resultantly, this appeal, being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
-
2004 (10) TMI 562 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Duplicators Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu 1984 57 STC 263, relied upon by the counsel for the appellant, is not applicable as in that case, the duplicating ink was not a commodity which was specifically manufactured for use by the customer and this was a consideration which weighed with the division Bench in reversing the orders of the sales tax authorities that those transactions were inter-State sales. In the present case, the goods were perforated to the requirements of the customers and could not be delivered or sold to any other customer. I, therefore, find that the assessing authority has rightly disallowed the claims of transfer and rightly treated these transactions as inter-State sales. 5.. In our opinion, the aforesaid finding is a pure finding of fact and no substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. 6.. Consequently, the reference is answered against the dealer and in favour of the department. Reference answered in favour of the department.
........
|
