|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 241 Records
-
1985 (4) TMI 327 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he wants to make his submissions in regard to the report, the Magistrate is bound to hear him. We may also observe that even though Magistrate is not bound to give notice of the hearing fixed for consideration of the report to the injured person or to any relative of the deceased, he may, in the exercise of his discretion, if he so thinks fit, give such notice to the injured person or to any particular relative or relatives of the deceased, but not giving of such notice will not have any invalidating effect on the order which may be made by the Magistrate on a consideration of the report. ( 5. ) THIS is our view in regard to the question which has arisen for consideration before us. Since the question is one of general importance, we would direct that copies of this judgment shall be sent to the High Courts in all the States so that the High Courts may in their turn circulate this judgment amongst the Magistrates within their respective jurisdiction. (RMC) Order accordingly.
-
1985 (4) TMI 326 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... on of the chart is as follows Assessment year Total Commission received Sales on which commission earned Rs. Rs. 1973-74 3,61,540.00 60,25,670 1974-75 4,05,458.93 67,57,650 1975-76 5,06,166.26 84,86,100 1976-77 5,39,991.66 89,99,867 The above chart shows the increase in sales from year to year. With reference to the bonus and commission account of the assessee, the assessee also produced certain vouchers which were seen by us. On the basis of the same and on the basis of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, we are of the view that the payment of commission by the assessee to Samrat Sales was bona fide and for the legitimate needs of its business as also reasonable. In the result, we find that there was no warrant or justification for making any disallowance. The disallowance has, therefore, to be deleted. 10. In the result, the appeals for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1976-77 are partly allowed, whereas the appeal for the assessment year 1974-75 is fully allowed.
-
1985 (4) TMI 325 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... turn are concerned, there is no explanation for the delay of about five months after the investigations were completed The detenu was permitted to be at large for all that time. In the grounds of detention, the detaining authority has not even considered this aspect. It should have applied its mind in the facts and circumstances of the case as to why there was inordinate delay in putting up the case before it. (12) We are fortified in the view which we have taken from a judgment of a Division Bench, to which one of us (Charanjit Talwar J.) was a party, in Ramash Lal. v. The Administrator and another (Criminal Writ No. 43 of 1984) decided on 16th May, 1984. The authorities cited by Mr. Bagai have no hearing to the point which has been discussed above. (13) We therefore, quash the impugned order of detention and made the rule absolute. We direct that the petitioner be set at liberty forth with unless required to be detained under any other valid order of an authority or court.
-
1985 (4) TMI 324 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s of the High Courts under Art. 226 of the Constitution are far and wide and the Judges must ever be vigilant to protect the citizen against arbitrary executive action , nonetheless , the Judges have a constructive role and therefore there is always the need to use such extensive powers with due circumspection. There has to be in the larger public interest an clement of self- ordained restraint. We hope and trust that the High Court will determine the extent of its territorial jurisdiction before making such interlocutory orders. In the result , the appeal succeeds and is allowed with costs. The impugned orders passed by the learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court dated March 13 , 1984 issuing a rule nisi on the petition filed by the respondents under Art. 226 of the Constitution and the ad-interim exparte prohibitory order made by him are set aside and the proceedings before the Calcutta High Court are quashed. We quantify the costs at ₹ 5,000. Appeal allowed.
-
1985 (4) TMI 323 - SUPREME COURT
officer must have 'reason to believe' that the incomes, profits or gains chargeable to income-tax have been under-assessed, then alone he can take action.
whether these grounds are adequate or not is not a matter for the court to investigate.
-
1985 (4) TMI 322 - SUPREME COURT
Society has no independent right qua the Society and it is the Society that is entitled to represent as the corporate aggregate.
-
1985 (4) TMI 321 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... would be contrary to all canons of fair play and violative of all principles of judicial propriety and administration to entertain a Writ Petition without disclosing the identity of the petitioner, though the court knows who the petitioner is. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the procedure adopted by the Division Bench was wrong and the Division Bench was not justified in directing that the two letters on which action was initiated by the Division Bench should not be kept in the record of the proceedings and that the identity of the guardian and the student should not be disclosed. We accordingly allow the appeal and set aside the orders dated 24th July, 1984 and 18th September, 1984 in so far as they direct the Chief Secretary to file an affidavit setting out the action taken by the State Government in implementing the recommendation contained in paragraph 16 of the Report of the Anti-ragging Committee. There will be no order as to costs of the appeal. Appeal allowed.
-
1985 (4) TMI 320 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rance of the owner himself, plaintiff's wife and the defendant-respondent leads me to conclude that there was no intention that compensation shall be paid, but the intention of the part was that it was gratuitous in nature. 24. Mr. Lodha, appearing on behalf of the plaintiff has submitted before the Court that one case has been decided by my learned brother Justice G.M. Lodha, in which he has taken a contrary view. The file was called and it is said that the case has been decided on 28th January, 1985, but no judgment is available and I am not in a position to express my opinion about the applicability of the said judgment in the facts and circumstances of this case, Mr. Lodha, could also not produce a copy of that judgment and is also not available with the Registry. 1 am not in a position to say that this is a case which needs a reference to a larger bench. 25. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is dismissed. The parties shall bear their own costs of this appeal.
-
1985 (4) TMI 319 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ). Further we are in agreement with the High Court that the power conferred upon the Local Authority is a quasi-judicial power which implies that the same has to be exercised after observing the principles of natural justice , that is to say , the decision that the occupants are not entitled to occupy the plots in their occupation has to be arrived at after hearing such occupants and that too by passing a speaking order which implies giving of reasons and that ensures the application of mind to only germane or relevant material on the record eschewing extraneous and irrelevant. Moreover any order of summary eviction based on any extraneous , non-germane , irrelevant or malafide considerations would be subject to the writ jurisdiction of Court. Having regard to these aspects , more absence of corrective machinery by way of appeal or review would not in our view render the provision invalid. In the result the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeals dismissed.
-
1985 (4) TMI 317 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e consider it unnecessary to call upon the Railway Admn. to redraw the seniority list. Let an order in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the Railway administration to assign seniority to the appellants over respondents No. 3 to 6. Seniority list shall stand redrawn as herein indicated. 5. Mr. G.D. Gupta, Learned counsel made some grievance about the communication produced at Exhibit P-5. That communication consists of a letter inviting certain persons to appear at a test to consider their suitability for further promotion. If for the post of chief clerk invitation to appear at a test is dependent upon the place in the seniority list, invitations shall be readjusted and reissued consistent with the directions given herein and test shall be held thereafter. 6. If any promotions are given since this appeal was admitted these shall be readjusted in accordance with the directions herein given. The appeal is allowed to that extent with costs quantified at ₹ 2,000/-.
-
1985 (4) TMI 316 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ned in Section 2(f). Therefore the orders of the lower authorities, holding that the appellants had offended the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, are proper. Duty has also been therefore rightly demanded. 6. But Shri Awasthi has further contended that in any event there was no case for imposition of penalty or ordering of confiscation with a right of redemption. We take into consideration the fact that we have held duty to be payable on the basis of the retrospective amendment of Section 2(f) under Act 6 of 1980. Having this consideration in mind, we feel that the imposition of penalty and the order for confiscation were not called for. Accordingly, we set aside the portion of the order under which penalty had been imposed and confiscation had been ordered. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent of setting aside the order of the lower authorities with reference to imposition of penalty and confiscation, but dismissed in other respects.
-
1985 (4) TMI 315 - CEGAT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... fabrics. The representative of the appellant contested the view that cross wires can be sold as such. 4. We had the opportunity of seeing the articles under consideration the rods as obtained by the appellant, the cold drawn wires made by them as well as the finished product. As rightly pointed out by the Senior Departmental Representative, Item 25(14) of Central Excise Tariff encompasses all wires which are referrable to across-sectional dimension of 13 mm or less. So, what is initially made in the factory of the appellant is a thinner wire from a thicker wire. Such wire is obviously a marketable product in its own right and cannot be considered as a semi-finished article for the purpose of making steel mesh. It is in the nature of a raw material. As a raw material, it will not be entitled to the facilities under Rule 56B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Collector’s order is, thus, maintainable on the facts of the case. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1985 (4) TMI 314 - CEGAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... d furnish a bank guarantee for the balance amount of ₹ 89,600/- (Rupees eighty-nine thousand six hundred only). The applicant is to comply with the terms of this order within four weeks from 19th April, 1985. Keeping in view the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of I.T.O. v. M.K. Mohd. Kunhi reported in AIR 1969 SC 430, we hold that this Tribunal has power to grant stay as incidental and ancillary to its appellate jurisdiction and it is a fit case where this court should exercise its power. We direct the stay of the Recovery Order dated 27-3-1985 passed by the Asst. Collector of Customs, Appraising Gr. I, Calcutta. It is further directed that the revenue will not pursue the recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. In case the applicant fails to comply with the terms of this stay order, the stay order shall stand automatically vacated and the applicant is to report the compliance of this order to this Court. Announced in open Court.
-
1985 (4) TMI 313 - CEGAT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... ron, copper and manganese, implying that caustic soda should be totally free from calcium and magnesium, natural impurities in either sodium chloride or sea water. Hence, even for the preparation of commercially acceptable grades of caustic soda, removal of calcium and magnesium is a necessity. Preparation of caustic soda from brine by electrolysis is a commercially and economically viable process. Because one of the raw materials used, viz., commercial grade sodium chloride, the need arises for removal of impurities referable to calcium and magnesium. This is done by precipitating these radicals with the aid of barium carbonate. Hence barium carbonate is a necessary chemical in the manufacture of caustic soda by a well-known commercial process. Accordingly we hold that barium carbonate is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 201/79 when used in the preparation of caustic soda by the electrolytic process, and allow the appeal with consequent benefit to the appellants.
-
1985 (4) TMI 312 - CEGAT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... reason to interfere with that penalty. 11. This brings to me the quantum of penalty under Rule 173Q itself. The only plea made on behalf of the appellant is that the duty involved is ₹ 1,300/- and the party has had a clean record for the last 20 years. As against this, one has to weigh the need to view infractions of provisions under the Self Removal Procedure strictly. A trust is reposed on the assessee and when that trust is betrayed, it has to be viewed with severity. In this case, it is all the more so when we are dealing with a Government organisation which ought to know better than to take things in a cavalier manner when the Assistant Manager (Production) authorised clearances (in the absence of his subordinate who used to attend to that work) without caring whether the regulations have been properly followed or not. Balancing these two needs, I order that the penalty under 173Q be reduced to ₹ 4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only). Ordered accordingly.
-
1985 (4) TMI 311 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... the Schedule. The articles named or clearly described in the Schedule are “articles of a kind used for sound..... recording, whether recorded or not”-and, amongst them, (“namely”) sound recorded magnetic tapes or cassettes. To repeat, the Appellants had not, at all material times, manufactured articles used for sound recording or, amongst them, sound recorded tapes and cannot, therefore, be liable to the payment of duty in terms of Item 59(2) or 59(4) of the Schedule. 45. In the premises, it has, necessarily, to be held that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, (a) recording sound on duty paid magnetic or cassette tapes is not “manufacture” in terms of the provisions of the Act, the Schedule or otherwise; and (b) in any event, the Appellants are not liable to pay any duty or fine whatsoever-not having manufactured the “excisable goods” in Item 59 of the Schedule, and, accordingly, the Appeals are all to be allowed.
-
1985 (4) TMI 310 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d supra) are distinguishable and on the ratio laid down in the decision of the Supreme Court in D. Cawasji which decision has been interpreted and followed in the various decisions of this court, I.T.C. cannot be denied its claim for refund of excess excise duty paid by them on the alleged ground that granting relief of refund to them would result in their unjust enrichment. 59. In the result, with respect I am unable to agree with the view taken by my learned brother Sawant J. Having regard to the findings recorded by me I agree with the view taken by my learned brother Lentin, J. I also agree with the final order proposed by Lentin, J. in para-24 of his judgment. 60. As far as the costs of the hearing before me are concerned, I direct that the parties shall bear their respective costs. 61. The papers may now be put up before the learned Chief Justice for placing the matter before the Division Bench for disposal in accordance with the opinion of the majority.
-
1985 (4) TMI 309 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... toluene received by Amber Paints could not have arisen till the goods were taken into use a in manner otherwise than as provided or in the event of unsatisfactory accountal of the goods. It will be clear, therefore, that a demand for differential duty on the occurrence of such eventualities would not be the same thing as a demand for duty on account of non-levy or short-levy. In this view of the matter, the 3rd proviso to Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, is not attracted in the instant case and the show cause notice is not consequently hit by the limitation contained in the said provision. 10. In the view we have taken, the judicial pronouncements as well as the Tribunal’s decisions on the correct interpretation of the aforesaid 3rd proviso to Section 36(2) are not relevant for the present case. 11. The preliminary objection raised by the learned Consultant for the Respondents is rejected. The appeal shall be listed for hearing on 13-5-1985.
-
1985 (4) TMI 308 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ery charges, and if so, to what extent and not whether the invoice shows delivery charges separately. If the price in the invoice and the price declared are identical and the latter was declared in the price lists to be inclusive of delivery charges, it has necessarily to be considered whether such delivery charges are to be excluded in the determination of the assessable value and to what extent, in terms of the ratio of the Supreme Court in 1983 E.L.T. 1896 (SC) 1983 ECR 1627 (Union of India v. Bombay Tyres International). 7. In the premises, we allow the Appeal, set aside the learned Collector’s order dated 10-3-1980 and the Assistant Collector’s order, dated 16-6-1976 and remand the matter for re-determination of the assessable value on the basis of such evidence as might have been available in the records or may be adduced by both the parties in the course of a de novo hearing and in the light of our observations hereinbefore. 8. Order accordingly.
-
1985 (4) TMI 307 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... il it does, we would have to prohibit it from doing so. 15. It is, of course, true that the spent earth was sold and was used in order to manufacture cheap washing soap. We cannot say that this is a reason for accessability of the spent earth. After all, much waste material can be sold and can be used to produce a good many things. But that will not make them manufactured articles liable to excise duty. 16. We have also seen the various rulings quoted by M/s. Hindustan Lever. We are in agreement with them, and furthermore think that the spent earth here should not be subjected to the same duty a second time. The fact that the central excise proposal will result in taking the same duty twice on an article which had not undergone any manufacture is, in our opinion, the stronger reason for holding the duty demanded by central excise to be not payable. 17. The Collector of Central Excise and his subordinates shall take note and act in accordance with these orders.
........
|
