|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 101 Records
-
1973 (4) TMI 107 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed specification. In those circumstances, this court had expressed the view that the transaction involved was only sale of pebbles and not a works contract. It is not in dispute that the assessee in these cases paid seigniorage fee to the revenue department for collection of the sand from Palar river. After removing the sand, the assessee can always divert the sand to any other purpose, as by paying the seigniorage fee, he becomes the owner of the sand which he collects from the river. Therefore, it has to be taken that the assessee became the owner of the sand as soon as he collected the same from the river and then the property in the sand has been transferred to the public works department when he supplied the sand in accordance with the contract entered into by him. In the circumstances, we hold that the Tribunal has come to the right conclusion in these cases. The tax cases are, therefore, dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee is Rs. 150 in each case. Petitions dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 106 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ng authority and which, in his opinion, was so grave as to warrant a legitimate inference that a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs and odd would have escaped assessment. But, ultimately, he gave an option to the petitioner to compound. The quantum of composition fee has been reduced by the Board. In these circumstances, when the statutory functionaries could act in two different channels and exercise their jurisdiction, the discovery of Rs. 9,000 and odd as the quantum of escapement of turnover by the assessing officer or the higher authority cannot, by itself, be a ground to hold that the call for a composition fee, which in the instant case, is Rs. 1,000 per month, for wrongful submission of incorrect returns is without jurisdiction or highly inequitable. There is, therefore, no error of jurisdiction or any violation of the principles of natural justice or any other error of law in the order challenged. The writ petition is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 100. Petition dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 105 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the case of Arjan Singh alias Puran v. Kartar Singh and OthersA.I.R. 1951 S.C. 193., their Lordships stated ...If the additional evidence was allowed to be adduced contrary to the principles governing the reception of such evidence, it would be a case of improper exercise of discretion, and the additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it was nonexistent...... That situation indeed arises in this case. Once we hold that fresh evidence has to be eschewed out of the record as non est, the second appeal has to be disposed of without considering this evidence and it would be for the Tribunal to find out whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conclusion which has been reached is justified or a different conclusion has to be reached. We decline to answer the second question for these reasons. We direct the parties to bear their own costs of these references. B.K. RAY, J.-I agree Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 104 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... question as it does not arise out of the appellate order and in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5.. Once the questions are answered our advisory jurisdiction ends and we are not entitled to give any directions to the Tribunal as to how the further proceeding is to be disposed of. Under section 24(5) of the Act, a copy of our judgment is to be sent to the Tribunal and the Tribunal is required to dispose of the case accordingly. We are, therefore, not in a position to accept the contention of Mr. Rath for the assessee that we should direct the Tribunal to rehear the appeal. In view, however, of the fact that the Tribunal proceeded on the footing that it was for the department to establish the quantum of the suppression, he appears not to have examined the other aspects of the matter. It would be for the Tribunal now to dispose of the appeal in an appropriate way in accordance with law. We make no order as to costs. B.K. RAY, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 103 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... and there can be no doubt that as laid down by their Lordships, the recitals in the bills will certainly have great evidentiary value, which, in the absence of anything more, ought to be taken to be correct. But, it cannot conclude the matter and, at any rate, cannot prevent the assessee from producing other materials in rebuttal. 9.. As a result of the discussion aforesaid, it is clear that the view taken by the learned Member of the Board of Revenue was perfectly justified and for that reason, we answer the reference as follows That, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the railway freight deducted in the bill could not be a part of the sale price as defined in section 2(o) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. 10.. Let the reference be returned to the Board of Revenue for passing the final order in accordance with our opinion. There shall be no order as to costs, especially when the respondent was not represented in this court. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 102 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... o in the case of an order under section 21, a further period of one year is allowed from the date of service of the notice under that section. But under the second proviso, there is no period of limitation for an assessment or reassessment to be made in consequence of or to give effect to any order or direction contained in section 9, 10 or 11. In the instant case, the ex parte assessment order was set aside not by the Sales Tax Officer, but by the appellate authority and, as such, there was no period of limitation for making a reassessment. The question is thus misconceived. The decision of this court in Gulabchand Munishkisore v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow 1970 26 S.T.C. 205., is, therefore, not relevant. We accordingly do not return any answer to question No. (2) and answer question No. (1) in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee is entitled to the costs which we assess at Rs. 100. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 101 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... with the goods. Such a transaction without more cannot be regarded as one in the course of export because etymologically in the course of export contemplates an integral relation or bond between the sale and the export.......... The purchase by the petitioner is distinct from the subsequent export by him to places outside Orissa and the transaction of purchase and the subsequent export cannot be tagged together to constitute one single transaction coming within the meaning of article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution or the provision of section 3 of the Central Act so as to make the levy of tax under section 3-B read with section 4 of the Orissa Act illegal. As the same question has been raised in all these cases and we do not accept the contention of the several petitioners, each of the writ petitions has to be dismissed. We accordingly dismiss them, but in the peculiar facts of the case, we direct the parties to bear their own costs. B.K. RAY, J.-I agree. Petitions dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 100 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... appeal before the appellate authority, or should have taken the permission of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to expand the appeal by including the disputed turnover of Rs. 30,00,000 and odd. But no such step was taken. We are, therefore, of the view that the Tribunal was right in rejecting the appeal as not maintainable. Against the same order of the Tribunal, which is now before us, the assessee filed Writ Petition No. 427 of 1970, reported as Easun Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Joint Commercial Tax Officer 1970 26 S.T.C. 486. and a Division Bench of this Court, to which one of us was a party, considered the order of the Tribunal and held that the Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction correctly in not entertaining the appeal relating to the turnover which was not the subject-matter of appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The order of the Tribunal was, therefore, upheld. The tax case is, therefore, dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 99 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed that the dealer is unable to pay the tax assessed or the penalty, if any, imposed or both, he may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, entertain an appeal without the tax or penalty or both having been paid or after part payment of such tax or penalty or both. This Ordinance was replaced by the Punjab General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act (7 of 1967) and the same provision exists in subsection (5) of section 20 as enacted by the Amendment Act. It is thus clear that in 1964, when the petitioner filed the appeal, it was not necessary under the proviso to section 20 of the Act to pay the amount of penalty before the appeal could be entertained. The order of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner is, therefore, against the statute and is liable to be quashed. For the reasons given above, this petition is allowed with costs and the appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal on merits without the payment of the penalty amount. Counsel s fee Rs. 100.
-
1973 (4) TMI 98 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the provisions for exemption in relation to excise duty should be deemed to be not in the statute from 5th January, 1957. The learned counsel for the respondent then contends that, by withdrawing the exemption with retrospective effect, the assessee will be put to considerable hardship as he fixed the sale price of the goods on the basis that the excise duty paid on the goods will be allowed as deduction in his assessment proceedings. But we cannot take note of the hardship pointed out by the learned counsel while construing the effect of the statutory provisions. If, as stated by the learned counsel for the respondent, there are any executive instructions giving benefit to such dealers who are affected by the retrospective effect being given to the statutory provisions, it is open to him to claim the benefit, if any, under those instructions. The order of the Tribunal is, therefore, set aside and the tax case is allowed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 97 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... aid condemned articles cannot be treated as scrap. But the court rejected that contention and held that any condemned article made of iron which is of no further use can be regarded as iron scrap and that iron scrap in any form wherever it comes from is of special importance to the industry in the country. The court observed thus In our view, the condemned articles fall within the description of iron scrap in item 4 of the Second Schedule. It appears to us also impossible to hold that condemned articles come within the purview of item 23 in the First Schedule which relates to machinery including hardware, iron and steel. Hardware, iron and steel referred to there must be in the form of machinery. Iron scrap consisting of condemned articles can hardly be described as machinery under item 23 of the First Schedule. We have therefore to uphold the view taken by the Tribunal in this case. The tax case is, therefore, dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 96 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cultural implements as such. Had it been the intention of the Legislature to exempt accessories, spare parts and components of agricultural implements, there would have been an express provision in the entry. In this connection reference may be made to the amendment introduced in item No. 13 of Schedule I of the Act by the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) (Amendment) Act, 1970 (West Bengal Act XII of 1970). As a result of the said amendment, in item No. 13, in column 2, the following entry has been inserted, namely, except tractors and power tillers and spare parts, accessories and component parts thereof . If the spare parts of tractors and power tillers can be treated as tractors and power tillers, there was no necessity for separately including them in the exception. Spare parts by themselves cannot be treated as agricultural implements. For the reasons stated above, this rule is discharged. Interim order, if any, is vacated. There will be no order as to costs. Rule discharged.
-
1973 (4) TMI 95 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is correct. If the word processed is to be construed in a general way requiring only continuous and regular action leading to the accomplishment of some result, I see no reason why black pepper and turmeric when converted into its powdered form does not involve an act of processing. It is not necessary, in my opinion, that in order to be a process within the meaning of section 2(b) of the Act, as a result of that process, the raw material should be converted into any other form. The word processed in its ordinary connotation would embrace within its scope the conversion of black pepper and turmeric into its powdered form. In my view, the sale of such powdered black pepper and turmeric would make the petitioner a dealer within the meaning of section 2(b) of the Act. For these reasons, this application fails. The rule is discharged. Interim order, if any, is vacated. There will be no order as to costs. Application dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 94 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ready initiated criminal proceedings and have produced the records, which were seized by the Sales Tax Officer, before the District Magistrate s Court (judicial), Tellicherry, and Sales Tax Cases 31, 32 and 33 of 1970 are pending before that court. It may not be proper on our part to make any direction regarding return of the books in these circumstances, without that court dealing with the question as regards the necessity for retaining them. It will be open to the petitioners to move that court for return of these books and papers if they are required by the petitioners before the termination of the criminal proceedings and we are sure that the matter will be carefully considered and appropriate orders passed by that court in the light of the observations made above. That court will also expedite the hearing of that case. In the result, with the above observations, we dismiss the original petition. But in the circumstances, we make no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1973 (4) TMI 93 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nd in the circumstances of this case, the Deputy Commissioner could exercise his power under section 30(5)(a)(ii) and if he failed to do so, whether the Tribunal, in exercise of its power under section 31, could do the same thing either by sending back the case to the assessing authority itself or by directing the appellate authority to do so. In either view of the matter, it is plain that the Tribunal has not approached the case from a correct angle and law. I, therefore, answer the second question in favour of the assessee and hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Deputy Commissioner or, as a matter of fact, the Commercial Taxes Tribunal could set aside the assessment and direct the assessing authority to make further enquiry on the basis of the declaration filed in form IX before the appellate authority and pass a fresh assessment order. There will be no order as to costs in this reference. S.K. JHA, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 92 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 12 S.T.C. 286 (S.C.). Carpet is a generic word. In Orissa carpets are understood to include sataranjis. It appears from Vrajlal Bhukhandas v. State of Gujarat 1964 15 S.T.C. 437. that sataranjis are understood as carpets even in Gujarat. Relying on the principle indicated therein the learned standing counsel contends that we must hold that woollen kambals other than hand-made kambals come under entry 46 and are liable to tax. We find no scope for taking a different view. The Tribunal took a wrong view in holding that woollen kambals come within entry 33 of the tax-free list. Our answer to the second question referred to us, therefore, shall be In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not right in holding that the mill-made woollen blankets come under serial No. 33 of the schedule of tax-free goods. We make no order as to costs as the assessee was not represented before us in spite of the notice. B.K. RAY, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 91 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ce that is so, best judgment assessments could be completed for all the five quarters to which the accounts related. 5.. In view of what we have said above, our answers to the two questions referred to us are (1) The expression period in section 12(8) cannot be construed as restricted to a quarter nor can it be said to relate to the whole year for which accounts are maintained by the assessee. (2) In view of the suppression detected on a date relating to the quarter ending March, 1962, it was permissible to complete best judgment assessments in respect of the quarters which the books of account related and the effect of suppression could not be confined or limited to that quarter only. 6.. We are sorry to find that the Tribunal had taken a view contrary to a reported decision of this court which was binding on it. 7.. As the assessee has not chosen to appear before us we think it appropriate to make no order as to costs. B.K. RAY, J.-I agree. References answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 90 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sed them as raw material for manufacturing or fabricating articles like test-tubes and toys. In the opinion of the court the word glassware was intended to mean only finished articles or goods which were sold to the consumer and not glass in semi-manufactured stage, which was used as raw material. In the present case, there is no finding that glass sheets manufactured by the assessee are used as raw material for manufacture or fabrication of other articles out of it. In fact, a contention to this effect was sought to be raised before the Judge (Revisions), but he declined to permit the assessee to raise that contention, because the same was not raised before the lower authorities. We, accordingly, answer the question in the affirmative in favour of the department and against the assessee. The assessee shall pay the costs of this reference to the Commissioner of Sales Tax, which we assess at Rs. 100. There would be one set of costs only. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1973 (4) TMI 89 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the Tribunal and we cannot hold that the acceptance of the affidavits had been raised before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has failed to deal with it, therefore, the aspect must be deemed to have been dealt with by the Tribunal. 6.. The affidavits though physically found on the record have not been legally made a part of it and, therefore, it was not necessary for the Tribunal to deal with and/or give reasons in not considering the affidavits filed before it. Once the assessee fails on that question, the other aspects do not indeed arise for consideration as conceded by Mr. Mohanty for the assessee. We would accordingly answer the fourth question in the negative as stated above and decline to answer the other three questions in the circumstances and for the reasons indicated above. We direct the parties to bear their own costs of this reference. Consequently the reference fee is available to be withdrawn by the assessee. B.K. RAY, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1973 (4) TMI 88 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ention in the section of the purpose for which the various items mentioned therein are to be put. As we read section 14(iv)(d)(iv), all that is necessary is that the article in question should be rolled steel section and once that is established, the use for which it may be put is wholly immaterial. Now, the question whether iron hoops can fall within the category of rolled steel sections can be answered only in case the process of manufacture of this item is known. Unfortunately it does not appear that in the present case parties led any evidence before the authorities concerned, showing the manner in which these hoops are manufactured. The question referred cannot as such be answered in the absence of relevant material. We are, in the instant case, left with no other option but to return the question unanswered. The question is accordingly returned unanswered. There will, however, be no order as to costs. Counsel s fee is assessed at Rs. 100. Reference returned unanswered.
|
