|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 780 Records
-
2007 (3) TMI 793
... ...
... ... ..... and 398 read with Section 402; (ii) to make appropriate orders bringing to an end the matters complained of and (iii) to regulate the conduct of the future affairs of the Company, the following order is passed (i) all the transfers effected after June, 2003 in respect of shares of the Company, impugned in the company petition, being violative of the articles of association, are hereby set aside and the Company shall accordingly, rectify the register of members within a period of 30 days; (ii) the members of the Company shall reconstitute the board of directors; appoint the managing director by 30.04.2007; carry on the regular business in accordance with the articles of association of the Company and meet the statutory obligations; (iii) the Company shall, hence forth give notice of the board meetings to every director by registered post with acknowledgment due. With the above directions, the company petition and connected applications stand disposed of. No order as to cost.
-
2007 (3) TMI 792
... ...
... ... ..... dition prescribed in section 23 of the Registration Act and we are unable to accept the contrary conclusion arrived at by the learned Judge. When there is no dispute that the certified copy of the final decree will not be issued unless it is engrossed on the required stamp papers and in view of the fact that after getting certified copy of the decree duly engrossed on the stamps, the petitioner presented the same before the respondent within the period prescribed in section 23 of the Registration Act, we are of the view that the respondent ought to have registered the document, if the same is otherwise in order. In these circumstances, the order of the learned judge dated 4.4.2003 is set aside and direction is issued to the respondent to register the certified copy of the final decree in O.S.No.538 of 1995 on the file of Subordinate Judge's Court, Cuddalore within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The writ appeal is allowed. No costs.
-
2007 (3) TMI 791
Grant of higher pay scale - Granted to other meter readers - Post of Meter Readers filled up by direct recruitment by 17 senior most Shift In charge - Award of the Industrial Tribunal - Petition filled after 17 years - HELD THAT:- The Industrial Tribunal in its Award proceeded on the basis that the concerned workmen were entitled to the benefit of higher scale as they were similarly situated to those 17 senior most Meter Readers. The direction in terms of the Award was confined only to those who were in employment at the time when the said benefit was given to the said 17 Meter Readers. They, thus, formed a class by themselves. A cut-off date having been fixed by the Tribunal, those who were thus not similarly situated, were to be treated to have formed a different class. They could not be treated alike with the others. The High Court, unfortunately, has not considered this aspect of the matter.
Section 18(3)(b) although, provides that all workmen who were employed in an establishment, subsequently become employed therein would also be bound by the Award of the Industrial Tribunal. But, they must be entitled to the similar benefits. Respondents were not parties to the said dispute. They did not raise any grievance in regard to their conditions of service.
There is another aspect of the matter which cannot be lost sight of. Respondents herein filed a Writ Petition after 17 years. They did not agitate their grievances for a long time. They, as noticed herein, did not claim parity with the 17 workmen at the earliest possible opportunity. They did not implead themselves as parties even in the reference made by the State before the Industrial Tribunal. It is not their case that after 1982, those employees who were employed or who were recruited after the cut-off date have been granted the said scale of pay. After such a long time, therefore, the Writ Petitions could not have been entertained even if they are similarly situated. It is trite that the discretionary jurisdiction may not be exercised in favour of those who approach the Court after a long time. Delay and laches are relevant factors for exercise of equitable jurisdiction.
We, therefore, are of the opinion that it was not a fit case where the High Court should have exercised its discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the respondents herein.
Thus, impugned Judgment cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. The Appeal is allowed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 790
... ...
... ... ..... abir, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 789
... ...
... ... ..... Chartered Accountant, thereafter which, the latter will submit his final report, serving copies on the parties. The entire verification process shall be completed by 31-5-2007. The final report is binding on the petitioners as well as respondents. The parties responsible for the irregularities shall make good the loss suffered, if any, by the Companies. The remuneration of the Chartered Accountant shall be borne by the Companies; (v)the Companies shall within two months finalise the accounts for the financial years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06, convene the annual general meeting and adopt the accounts for these financial years and appoint auditors in compliance with the requirements of relevant articles of association; and (vi)the parties shall file an affidavit of compliance in terms of this order by 15-6-2007. With the above directions, the company petitions and connected applications stand disposed of. In view of this, the interim orders are vacated. No order as to cost.
-
2007 (3) TMI 788
... ...
... ... ..... , 1975 after giving opportunity to the assessee to dispute the correctness of those figures. 27. While answering the reference, we have also expressed our view that the first two questions raised before the learned Single Judge, namely, whether cess is payable under the Act only by a manufacturer of textile who is liable to pay duty of excise under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and whether the manufacturer of the hosiery goods are exempted from the payment of cess under the Act should be answered against the writ petitioner. 28. We, therefore, even do not find any merit in the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner against the two other findings recorded by the learned Trial Judge. The appeal is also therefore disposed of by dismissing the same after affirming the finding of the learned Trial Judge on those two issues. 29. In the facts and circumstances, there will be, however, no order as to costs. 30. Per Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. . - I agree.
-
2007 (3) TMI 787
... ...
... ... ..... uction of bicycle for exports. 3. Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondents could not successfully rebut the factual statements borne out from the record and the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner. 4. After hearing learned counsel, we find merit in the argument raised in support of the petition, the appeal is well within limitation as it was filed within 45 days. Moreover, it is a case where the waiver of pre-deposit should have been granted to the petitioner. Keeping in view the fact that the manufacturing unit of the petitioner was lying closed since July 8, 2001. 5. Accordingly, we quash order Annexure P.9 and direct Respondent No. 1 to entertain the appeal by considering the same to be within limitation and waive of the condition of pre-deposit. The appeal be decided on merits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. The writ petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above.
-
2007 (3) TMI 786
... ...
... ... ..... Reddy, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 785
... ...
... ... ..... Officer. In the result, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed." 11. Since the quantum appeal filed by the assessee has been dismissed by this very Court, the income-tax authorities were right in holding that the assessee concealed its income to the extent of ₹ 16 lakhs and as such, penalty of ₹ 7,36,000 has been rightly levied on the assessee for concealment of income under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and there are concurrent findings of facts to this effect by these statutory authorities. 12. The above being the position, no fault can be found with the view taken by the Tribunal. Thus, the order of the Tribunal does not give rise to a question of law, much less a substantial question of law, to fall within the limited purview of section 260A of the Act, which is confined to entertaining only such appeals against the order which involves a substantial question of law. 13. Accordingly, the present appeal filed by the assessee is, hereby, dismissed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 784
... ...
... ... ..... the undertaking located at Faridabad are new and no old machineries are purchased. iv) The appellant company has brought into India payment in convertible foreign exchange within period of six months or extended period as per letter of Punjab National Bank, Faridabad, a copy of which has been filed at appellate stage. v) The report of Chartered Accountant has been filed alongwith the return of income. vi) There is no change in the share holding of the company." 7. Nothing was brought on record by the department that any of the conditions mentioned above were not complied with or that the findings recorded by the CIT(Appeals) was not as per materials placed on the record. 8. In view of the above discussion, we are inclined to agree with the learned AR Shri Ved Jain that there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT(Appeals) for directing the Assessing Officer to allow claim of deduction under sec. 10A of the Act. 9. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 783
... ...
... ... ..... mil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 does not suffer any legislative competency; nor its provisions are arbitrary and unreasonable, violative of principles of natural justice; nor offends Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India; (ii)the writ petitions as well as the writ appeal questioning the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Act are dismissed; (iii)in so far as the writ petitions challenging the consequential attachment proceedings taken and the criminal action initiated as well as the civil miscellaneous appeals that arise out of the order of Special Court are concerned, as the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Act are held valid, we do not want to interfere with such proceedings and hence, those writ petitions as well as the civil miscellaneous appeals are also dismissed; (iv)consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed; and (v)however, in the circumstances, there is no order as to costs.
-
2007 (3) TMI 782
... ...
... ... ..... ns substitute subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can , by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking out. the "inscrutable face of a sphinx" is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance. 10. The inevitable conclusion is that the impugned order of the High Court is unsustainable and is set aside. The appeal is allowed. No costs.
-
2007 (3) TMI 781
... ...
... ... ..... 6 (193) ELT 495 (Tri.-Del.) has taken note of the Circular as well as the earlier order in the case of Jayanti Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. (cited supra) and has held that assessment Shri Patil also states that in the instant case M/s. Merry Weathers Food Products Ltd. was manufacturing the impugned ice-creams and selling to M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd., the Appellant who before us and the duty has been paid at the price M/s. Hindustan Lever sold to the catering establishment and hotels and restaurants. He confirms that the duty has been paid under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on sale price of M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Keeping in view the Board's Circular letter cited above and the subsequent judgment of the Tribunal, we are of the view that the duty has been correctly paid under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in respect of impugned ice creams and therefore, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.
-
2007 (3) TMI 780
... ...
... ... ..... that the respondent was entitled to avail CENVAT Credit on service tax paid on mobile phones services in terms of Rule 3 read with Rule 2(L) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 despite the respondent not having established that the same was in relation to the business activity as envisaged under Rule 9(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules,2004?” After the paper book is filed, the appeal be listed for final hearing.
-
2007 (3) TMI 779
... ...
... ... ..... oneous and his order is unsustainable. It is evident that the discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act is exercised by the civil judge in contravention of the law laid down by this Court that the expression "sufficient cause" should receive liberal construction, in a catena of decisions (see State of West Bengal v. Administrator, Howrah Mjnicipality, AIR 1972 SC 749 ; 1972 1 SCC 366 Smt Sandhya Rani Sarkar v. Smt Sudha Rani Debi Air 1978 SC 537 1978 2 SCC 116). The High Court in exercising its jurisdiction under section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, failed to correct the jurisdictions error of the appellate Court.” 6. Respectfully, following the above decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court we condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee before the CIT(A). the CIT(A) is directed to consider the appeal of the assessee afresh and decide the issues raised purely on merits of the case. 7. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 778
... ...
... ... ..... ct, 1961. The grounds of appeal No. 2,3 and 4 are thus decided in favour of the appellant". o p /o p Learned CIT(A) has considered the fact that the firm was converted into a Company on 24.7.2001 and it became a STP unit in 2002. This conversion of firm into a company is not a transfer as held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Texspin Engineering (Supra). Therefore, there is no question of violation of section 10A(2)(ii) of the IT Act because the undertaking was not formed by splitting or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The aforesaid finding, in our opinion is justified and does not call for any interference. Accordingly, we uphold the finding recorded by the CIT(A). 6.1 Considering the facts of the case we are of the view that conversion of firm to Company and claim of exemption u/s 10A is supported by the Circular issued by the Board. Hence, the impugned order does not require any interference. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 777
... ...
... ... ..... fit of payment of tax at lower rate of tax as provided under Section 5C of the Act of 1954 but the Tax Board without examining the fact whether the assessee in fact has paid tax beyond the tax rate prescribed under Section 5C, allowed the set off of ₹ 15,537/-.The Tax Board either itself should have examined the fact in this respect or should have remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority to inquire into the matter in the light of decision on the point of law decided by the Tax Board so that the fact, which from the orders of the Assessing Authority and the Appellate Authority is not clear and left out could have been decided. In view of the above, the revision petition is partly allowed and the order of the Tax Board dated 19.6.2001, in relation to entitlement of benefit of set off to assessee is upheld. The matter is remanded to the Assessing Authority to record a finding about the actual liability of assessee in the light of observations made above and proceed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 776
... ...
... ... ..... hence, imposed penalty. 2. The learned Counsel submits that in an identical situation, the High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCE, Bangalore-II v. Sunita Shetty 2006 (3) S.T.R. 404 (Kar.) 2004 (174) E.L.T. 313 (Kar.) held that where the Dy. Commissioner had exercised his jurisdiction properly and found bona fide in dropping the proceedings, the same cannot be reversed. 3. The learned JDR distinguishes the judgments. He submits that in the present case the Asst. Commissioner was required to have imposed penalty. 4. On a careful consideration, we notice that the learned Counsel has relied on the High Court of Karnataka’s judgment rendered in the case of CCE v. Sunita Shetty (supra), prima facie it appears to be identical to the facts of this case, hence, the stay application is allowed. As the issue in this case can be heard before Single Member Bench, therefore the matter can be heard finally on 23rd March 2007. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2007 (3) TMI 775
... ...
... ... ..... he assessee has not been able to controvert the observations recorded by the learned CIT(A) to the effect that apropos the National AC, the stand of the assessee was not substantiated and apropos the local made AC, the source of purchase was not explained and further, that no such plea was taken at the time of the search proceedings. The assessee has also not been able to controvert the findings with regard to the dish antenna, as recorded by the learned CIT(A). Moreover, apropos this dish antenna, a relief of ₹ 10,000 has already been granted by the learned CIT(A) to the assessee. In these facts, we do not find any error with the order of the learned CIT(A), which we hereby sustain. 58. In view of the above discussion, the appeal of the assessee is entitled to be partly accepted as indicated. It is so ordered. 59. In the result, IT(SS)A No. 22/Asr/2002, filed by the Department is dismissed whereas IT(SS)A No. 19/Asr/2002, the appeal of the assessee, is partly allowed.
-
2007 (3) TMI 774
... ...
... ... ..... sible and obliged under the contract to provide the taxable service. In the present case, the taxable services are maintenance and repair. The whole of those services are the contractual obligation of the appellant and appellant is responsible for them to HAL. Thus, there is no contract and sub-contract in the present case. That the beneficiary of the service is someone other than the purchaser of the service is altogether irrelevant. 8. In the above factual and legal situation, we find no merit in the present appeals in as far as they relate to the tax demand on the appellant and the appellant's claim for refund. However, given the nature of the dispute and the fact that all relevant facts remained disclosed to the revenue authorities, penalty is not justified. Accordingly, tax demand is confirmed and refund claim rejected. Penalty is also set aside. 9. Both the appeals are ordered accordingly. (Operative part of the order pronounced in the court at the end of hearing.)
........
|
