|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 361 to 380 of 772 Records
-
2005 (2) TMI 551
Penalty under Compounded Levy Scheme - Misdeclaration of type of furnace ... ... ... ... ..... plied by them. Therefore, the monthly duty liability of the respondents under Rule 96-ZP(3) was worked out as Rs. 6,51,108/-. Consequently, the demand for the differential duty was raised through a show cause notice from the respondents. 3. emsp No doubt the differential duty had been paid with interest before 25-5-1999 by the respondents, but that itself could not be made basis for quashing the imposition of penalty on them in toto. For the non-payment of the appropriate duty, the respondents are liable to pay the penalty under Rule 96ZP(3)(ii) of the rules and the Commissioner (Appeals) could not quash the same. Therefore, the impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in this regard cannot be sustained and deserves to be modified. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we accordingly impose penalty of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) on the respondents. 4. emsp Consequently, the appeal of the Revenue stands disposed of in the above terms.
-
2005 (2) TMI 550
Import - OGL - Valuation - Transaction value, enhancement of ... ... ... ... ..... Tribunal rsquo s order in M/s. Competent Business Machines v. Commissioner of Customs, Trichirapalli - Final Order No. 18/05/NB-A dated 31-12-2004. The Tribunal has held that second-hand photocopiers are capital goods, on the basis of its earlier decision in M/s. SKD Commercial v. Commissioner of Customs - Final Order No. A/893/WZB/04/C-II dated 25-10-2004 2005 (180) E.L.T. 84 (T) . On the valuation aspect, the Tribunal has held that in the absence of any data available on the website in respect of some other model imported by the appellants comparison of data from website for another model is not reliable evidence for enhancement of the value. In the present case, the position is still worse as the only basis on which the value of the goods has been loaded is that identical/similar branded have been noticed to be imported at higher value than that declared by the importer. Following the ratio of the above order, we set aside the present impugned orders and allow the appeals.
-
2005 (2) TMI 549
... ...
... ... ..... 20-11-2002 claiming assessment of the delayed quantity at a reduced price (5 ). The lower authorities rejected the claim. The appellant is before us in appeal against the rejection. 2. emsp We have perused the records and heard both the sides. It is noted that the original assessment, and payment of duty took place at the contracted price. The change in the amount paid is on account of imposition of penalty for delayed period. The penalty is separate from the price of the goods. There is no provision in the excise law for allowing deduction of penalty from the sale price for the purpose of assessable value. In these circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is rejected.
-
2005 (2) TMI 548
Interest on delayed refund of pre-deposit in spite of Tribunal’s order ... ... ... ... ..... h February, 2005. In case, the Revenue fail to refund the amount in pursuance to the final order passed by the Tribunal, the interest accrued to the appellant for delay in refund shall be recovered from the pay of the Officer who caused delay. Copy of this order be sent to the Secretary (Revenue), Ministry of Finance, as well as to the Chairman of the Central Board of Excise and Customs, North Block, New Delhi for necessary action. Copy of the Order be issued Dasti. Adjourned to 25-2-2005.
-
2005 (2) TMI 547
Winding up - Powers of Liquidator ... ... ... ... ..... e sanction of the Court to settle the list of contributories and for filing of proof by the creditors of the company in respect of their debts and claims for priority if any under section 530 of the Companies Act, 1956 and the exercise by the Official Liquidator, all or any of the powers under section 457 and any other matters requiring directions of the Court as follows (1) to institute or defend any suit, prosecution, or other legal proceeding, civil or criminal, in the name and on behalf of the company (2) to sell the immovable and movable property and actionable claims of the company by public auction or private contract, with power to transfer the whole thereof to any person or body corporate, or to sell the same in parcels (3) to raise on the security of the assets of the company any money requisite (4) to do all such other things as may be necessary for winding up the affairs of the company and distributing its assets. 5. The application accordingly stands disposed of.
-
2005 (2) TMI 546
Share capital - Reduction of ... ... ... ... ..... ourt of Gujarat on the day of 28th February, 2005, reduced from Rs. 507,96,98,519 (Rupees Five Hundred Seven Crores Ninety Six Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Five Hundred Nineteen only) divided into 51,18,32,783 Equity Shares of Rs. 10 each into Rs. 304,78,19,111 (Rupees Three Hundred Four Crores Seventy Eight Lacs Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Eleven Only) divided into 30,70,99,670 equity shares of Rs. 10 each. 31. The procedure laid down under section 102(2) and (3) of the Act, as regards the creditors is hereby dispensed with. The petitioner is also permitted to dispense with the use of the words and reduced . 32. The petitioner is directed to publish the notice of confirmation of reduction of capital and approving of the minutes in the Indian Express English Daily Vadodara Edition and Gujarat Mitra Gujarati Daily Surat Edition within 14 days of the registration of the order with the Registrar of Companies. 33. The petition is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs.
-
2005 (2) TMI 545
Company Law Board - Appeal against orders of ... ... ... ... ..... g out of orders of the CLB, this Court cannot decide such disputed questions of fact. Thus, even if the resolution allegedly adopted at the EGM of the appellant No. 5-company, on 25-8-2004 removing the respondent No. 1 is a circumstance which has arisen after the interim order was passed by the court on 14-5-2004, this court does not have the jurisdiction under section 10F, to either stay the said resolution or declare the said resolution as void. The remedy of the respondents is to move any forum, the civil court or the CLB, which has original jurisdiction to declare such resolution as null and void and to pass any interim order in relation to the said resolution. 13. In the result, the Miscellaneous Cases are dismissed and the interim orders passed by this Court on 1-11-2003 staying operation of the resolution adopted in the EGM of the company Utkal Motors (P.) Ltd. said to have been held on 25-8-2004 removing the respondent No. 1 as director of the said company is vacated.
-
2005 (2) TMI 544
Investigation of affairs of a company ... ... ... ... ..... e that can be used against Company. By implication, learned counsel for petitioner tried to invoke the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. This question was no longer res integra. A constitutional bench of five judges of the Supreme Court had settled the controversy in Raja Narayanlal Bansi Lal v. Maneck Phirose Mistry AIR 1961 SC 29. According to said decision when a person is called upon under the provisions of Act, to give evidence and produce documents he cannot be said to be a person accused of any offence as is required under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. 8. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court finds no merit in the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner, it is not necessary to discuss various decisions cited at the time of arguments because in none of them controversy involved in the present case was dealt with. In the result, the writ petition fails and is accordingly stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
2005 (2) TMI 543
Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... in C.P. Nos. 35 of 1990, 34 of 1991 and 24 of 1992, holding that the sale in favour of the appellants in OSA No. 13 of 2004 ought not to be confirmed, warrants no interference. We only clarify that as a legal principle the violation by a creditor of a condition imposed by this Court while granting leave to remain outside the liquidation proceedings would not ipso facto lead to invalidity of the sale of the properties of the company in liquidation. In an appropriate case the court may, in the context of the fact situation before it, decline to interfere with the sale while considering what alternative and appropriate steps should be pursued for the violation of the conditions mandated by it. 21. We also place on record our appreciation for the assistance rendered, thoroughness of preparation and the professional commitment of Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, a young lawyer who appeared for the appellant- Corporation in OSA No. 2 of 2004. The appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
2005 (2) TMI 542
Winding up - Affidavit in opposition ... ... ... ... ..... nt-company, has appeared today and has stated that on account of his illness, he had not been able to appear in this case, and also in view of the fact that the counter-affidavit has been filed today on behalf of the respondent-company, I am not inclined to impose cost for the adjournment on 3rd February, 2005. 62. It is accordingly directed that the delay in filing the counter-affidavit on behalf of the respondent-company be condoned and the said counter-affidavit be taken on record subject to payment of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand) by the respondent-company. The cost will be paid by the respondent-company by the next date fixed in the matter. 63. Sri Amit Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner-company prays for and is granted four weeks rsquo time for filing rejoinder affidavit to the aforesaid counter-affidavit. 64. List this case on 22nd March, 2005. 65. The case will be listed among the case listed at the top of the cause list of the said date. Order accordingly.
-
2005 (2) TMI 541
Debts and claims against company ... ... ... ... ..... e fixed for submission thereof was 25-10-2004. The applicant submitted that he was residing with his son Mr. Amit Khandelwal at 183/C, Napier Town, Jabalpur (M.P.) and he could not come across to the notice thereunder the claims were invited by the Official Liquidator one of his colleague informed him about the said advertisement. The applicant immediately on coming to know about this fact submitted his claim before the Official Liquidator on 16th of November, 2004, there is a delay of about less than one month. 5. Having gone through the contents of the application I am satisfied that the delay made in filing of the claim by the applicant has satisfactorily been explained. 6. The application accordingly succeeds and the same is allowed. The delay of 22 days made in filing of the claim by the applicant before the Official Liquidator is condoned. The Official Liquidator is directed to register the claim of the applicant and make adjudication thereof in accordance with the law.
-
2005 (2) TMI 540
Share capital - Reduction of ... ... ... ... ..... pinion the said procedure is required to be discontinued. However it is necessary that the company while making an application for confirmation of reduction of share capital under sections 100 to 101 either independently or along with amalgamation petition under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act the company must aver in the petition that whether a reduction in the share capital proposed is likely to affect in any manner the interest of the creditors or not. This would enable the court to ascertain whether the power under sub-section (2) for giving specific directions under the third categories of the cases should be exercised or not. The office of the Company Registrar is thus directed to ensure that such necessary averments are made in the petition wherever the cases involve a reduction in share capital. 30. In light of the above observation the application is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) with the aforesaid directions contained in a preceding paragraph.
-
2005 (2) TMI 539
Winding-up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... facie appears correct. The petitioner nowhere stated that the other amount of rupees six lakhs and odd has been paid by the Company. The difference in these two claims is another ground on the basis of which prima facie it can safely be inferred that the petitioner has not come up with clean hands and this petition is an attempt to recover the amount aforesaid at the threat of winding-up. The petitioner has not filed the civil suit. The petitioner has adopted a short-cut and attempted to get the adjudication of its claim without paying court fee. This claim made by the petitioner does not fall within the domain of the winding-up jurisdiction of the court. It is a case where appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file the civil suit but it was not done for the obvious reason that it does not want to pay the court fees. The relief of the nature as prayed for in the petition cannot be granted to the petitioner. 5. In the result this petition fails and the same is dismissed.
-
2005 (2) TMI 538
Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... ma facie appears correct. The petitioner nowhere stated that the other amount of rupees six lakhs odd has been paid by the company. The difference in these two claims is another ground on the basis of which prima facie it can safely be inferred that the petitioner has not come up with clean hands and this petition is an attempt to recover the amount aforesaid at the threat of winding up. The petitioner has not filed the civil suit. The petitioner has adopted a short cut and attempted to get the adjudication of its claim without paying court fee. This claim made by the petitioner does not fall within the domain of the winding up jurisdiction of the court. It is a case where appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file the civil suit but it was not done for the obvious reason that it does not want to pay the court fees. The relief of the nature as prayed for in the petition cannot be granted to the petitioner. 5. In the result, this petition fails and the same is dismissed.
-
2005 (2) TMI 537
Debts and claims against company ... ... ... ... ..... an, Jaipur. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has a claim/debt of Rs. 26,606 on the Company towards EPF Contribution etc. under the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. 7. The learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that this matter is squarely covered by the decision of this Bench delivered today in S.B. Company Application No. 4/2005 in the matter of M/s. Spintex Tubes and Cons. Limited (In Liquidation). 8. For the reasons stated in the order dated 4-2-2005 delivered by this Bench in S.B. Company Application No. 4/2005, this application succeeds and the same is allowed. 9. The delay made in filing of the claim by the claimant before the Official Liquidator deserves condonation and accordingly the same is condoned. The Official Liquidator is directed to register the claim of the applicant and adjudicate it in accordance with the law. 10. The application accordingly stands disposed of.
-
2005 (2) TMI 536
Debts and claims against company ... ... ... ... ..... re the Official Liquidator. The applicant sent its claim by post on 10-11-1997 but it received undelivered. The petitioner submitted its claim with the Official Liquidator under the letter dated 25-10-2002. The Official Liquidator informed the applicant that the claim is not within limitation and unless the delay made in filing thereof is condoned by the court it cannot be registered and adjudicated upon, hence this application. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the application and keeping in view the fact that the claim pertains to the employees rsquo provident fund contribution etc. that is for the benefit of the employees, the delay made in filing of the claim by the claimant before the Official Liquidator deserves condonation and accordingly the same is condoned. The Official Liquidator to register the claim of the applicant and adjudicate upon it in accordance with the law. 9. The application accordingly stands disposed of.
-
2005 (2) TMI 535
Form of Contracts ... ... ... ... ..... of Rs. 3,00,000. Therefore, they are not entitled to refund of the said amount with damages and interest as claimed. In case of different view of the matter, if it is held that the amount was paid towards earnest money of the concluded contract, with a view to completely deciding the suit, I record my finding with regard to the amount payable to the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs have not led any evidence as to the damages they suffered. Therefore, on account of damages, they would not be entitled to any amount. They would be entitled to refund of Rs. 3,00,000 with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the suit till payment. This issue is, therefore, answered in the negative. Issue No. 11 mdash 41. In view of the aforesaid findings, this issue does not survive as the Plaintiffs are not entitled to creation of the charge over the suit property. Hence, this issue is answered in the negative. 42. Hence, the Suit is dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
2005 (2) TMI 534
Winding up - Powers of Court to stay or restrain proceeding against company ... ... ... ... ..... made clear that if any such on time settlement is arrived at then the committee will make thereafter a necessary report to this court for disbursement of the amount providing for disposal of some of the assets of the company. I am unable to vacate the stay order which is already passed by this court on 12-4-2004 and16-7-2004 in the light of the aforesaid circumstances which I have explained in detail. However I am of the opinion that at this stage the secured creditors can be protected only to the extent which is provided herein-before in this order. I thus dispose of the said Judges rsquo summons initiated by the Fixed deposit holders in terms of the aforesaid order and the directions as contained hereinabove. These directions also shall be applicable to other secured creditors who have sought similar relief though only by oral application. I dispose of the said three reports and the Judges Summons (L) No. 704 of 2004 accordingly. However these shall be no order as to costs.
-
2005 (2) TMI 533
Share capital - Further issue of ... ... ... ... ..... learned counsel for the plaintiff invites my attention to some previous correspondence and points out that all previous correspondence was sent by electronic mail as well as by courier. Such an important communication as an offer of additional shares has not been sent by either electronic mail or by courier or by registered post or even under certificate of posting. This prima facie raises a serious doubt about the communication. Prima facie, I am satisfied that the defendants have not proved that the offer was sent to the plaintiff. There is prima facie breach of Article 53(3) of the Articles of Association. Hence, this is a fit case for grant of an ad-intrim relief. 5. Accordingly, the defendants are restrained by an injunction from in any manner utilising, using or exercising any rights in respect of or under the new shares issued to the defendant Nos. 2 and 3 or in any manner dealing with the new shares till the disposal of this motion. 6. Motion is made returnable early.
-
2005 (2) TMI 532
Winding-up - Avoidance of certain attachment, execution, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... ency pursuant to the orders passed by the BIFR under sub-section (4) of section 20 of the SICA before the commencement of winding up of the Company. It was, therefore, for the IPICOL as the operating agency and the BIFR to ensure that the sale of the assets of the Company was for adequate and reasonable price and was made after proper valuation by an expert valuer. Once such a sale has been made by the IPICOL as an operating agency and once such sale has been approved by the BIFR in exercise of its statutory powers under sub-section (4) of section 20 of the SICA, the High Court as a Company Court under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 cannot declare such sale as null and void on the ground that the IPICOL and the BIFR did not ensure that the sale was made without a proper valuation of the assets of the Company which were put to sale. For the aforesaid reasons, I find no merit in this Misc. Case and, accordingly, dismiss the same.
............
|
