Tax Management India. Com
                            Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Short Notes News Articles Highlights
        Home        
 
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax This
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

VAT and Sales Tax - Case Laws

Showing 22021 to 22040 of 22606 Records

  • 1957 (3) TMI 50

    ... ...
    ... ... ion of the kind indicated in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of section 16, but whether or not it is so, I do not decide. For the reasons I have given, this appeal is dismissed with costs. Certified for two counsel. DAS GUPTA, J.-I agree. Appeal dismissed.


  • 1957 (3) TMI 49

    ... ...
    ... ... all the questions referred by the Board of Revenue to the High Court should be answered against the assessee and in favour of the State of Bihar. The assessee must pay the cost of this reference, hearing fee Rs. 250. Reference answered accordingly.


  • 1957 (3) TMI 48

    ... ...
    ... ... t pay to the appellants, half the costs of the appeal and with regard to the costs below, the order of costs made by the learned Judge will be set aside and we direct that the respondent should pay Rs. 250 to the appellants as costs. Appeal allowed.


  • 1957 (3) TMI 47

    ... ...
    ... ... f fine which may extend to Rs. 1,000. This is exactly what section 14 of the Act provides and no new offence or punishment has been created by the Notification. I do not see any force in this petition. It is accordingly rejected. Petition dismissed.


  • 1957 (3) TMI 46

    ... ...
    ... ... he opposite party No. 1, the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, In charge, Check Post Hindon Bridge, Ghaziabad, not to make an endorsement to the effect that the delivery will not be made except in the presence of the Sales Tax Officer. Petitions allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 53

    ... ...
    ... ... ion. 7.. For all these reasons, I would answer questions Nos. (1), (2), (3) and (5) in the affirmative and question No. (4) in the negative. There will be no order as to costs of this reference. SAMVATSAR, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 52

    ... ...
    ... ... reasons, I would answer both the parts of the question stated by the Commissioner for the opinion of this Court in the affirmative. Parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. SAMVATSAR, J.- I agree. Reference answered in the affirmative.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 51

    ... ...
    ... ... epartment was remiss in not charging the tax in the first instance and also in not serving the order betimes or replying to the notices sent by the petitioner, we think that the costs of this petition should be borne as incurred. Petition dismissed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 50

    ... ...
    ... ... shall issue preventing the Sales Tax Officer from recovering tax and imposing penalty so long as that contingency does not occur. That under the circumstances of the case the parties do bear their own costs. SAMVATSAR, J.-I agree. Petition allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 49

    ... ...
    ... ... ly with what happens at the sale point, where there was no freight at all. In this view, the appeal is allowed, and the suit will stand dismissed, but, in the circumstances without costs in all the Courts. Leave to appeal is granted. Appeal allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 48

    ... ...
    ... ... question formulated earlier in this judgment in the affirmative, allow the revision and the Appellate Tribunal should decide the merits of the remaining two petitions. In the circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs. Revision allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 47

    ... ...
    ... ... by the lower Court was unsustainable in law. I, therefore, allow the revision petition, set aside the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioners and acquit them. The fine if paid by the petitioners will be refunded to them. Petition allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 46

    ... ...
    ... ... nt from Kheti cannot be included in the petitioner s taxable turnover. The respondents shall bear the petitioner s costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 50. The petitioner is entitled to the refund of the outstanding amounts of his securities. Petitions allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 45

    ... ...
    ... ... n O.J.C. Nos. 184 and 185 of 1955 as time-barred. I would allow the claim for refund in O.J.C. Nos. 186 of 1955, 187 of 1955 and 188 of 1955. Both parties will bear their own costs of these applications. DAS, J.-I agree. Applications partly allowed.


  • 1957 (2) TMI 44

    Whether the 1st respondent, the State of Uttar Pradesh, illegally and unauthorisedly levied sales tax on the 2nd petitioner-firm, under the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act (U.P. Act XV of 1948) with regard to the cloth manufactured by the 2nd petitioner, with a view to exporting such cloth outside the territories of India, by customers of the 2nd petitioner called indentors ? - Held that - There is a vast difference between prepared cashew-nuts and p....... + More


  • 1957 (1) TMI 33

    ... ...
    ... ... the purposes of item No. 30 of the schedule of the rate of tax published on 22nd May, 1950. The third question is answered accordingly. 4.. There will be no order as to costs of this reference. SAMVATSAR, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.


  • 1957 (1) TMI 32

    ... ...
    ... ... ns felt by the accused then and there and the apologies tendered to the officer instantaneously, the fines of Rs. 500 and Rs. 100 seem to be excessive. The fine amounts are halved and the excess amounts collected will be refunded. Sentence modified.


  • 1957 (1) TMI 31

    ... ...
    ... ... ales. The challenge to the constitutional validity of the tax imposition is therefore rejected. No other point having been raised in these revisions for our consideration, the Tax Revision Cases fail and are dismissed. No costs. Petitions dismissed.


  • 1957 (1) TMI 30

    ... ...
    ... ... rs to both the questions are thus in the affirmative. A copy of this opinion shall be sent to the Tribunal concerned as provided in the Act. In the circumstances of the case there shall be no order about costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.


  • 1957 (1) TMI 29

    ... ...
    ... ... applicable, the respondent must be deemed to be the first dealer in this State and is, therefore, liable to tax. The order of the Tribunal is set aside and the respondent will pay the costs of the petitioner. Advocate s fee Rs. 50. Order set aside.


 
 
 
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.