|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 201 Records
-
1980 (3) TMI 255 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... he testimony of Shri Chari implicating him was false or prompted by enmity. Government, therefore, have no hesitation in holding that the statement given by Shri Shripad Rajaram Chari contain the correct and true narration of facts clearly implicating the petitioners. Even if one were to look for independent corroboration of this testimony that is also available from the recovery of a jacket of similar kind from the drawer of the petitioner. The fact of the petitioner’s involvement in the smuggling of the impugned gold gets further strengthened by an admitted fact that he along with Shri Chari had been involved in a big smuggling racket a sometime earlier. In the circumstances, Government have no hesitation in holding that the petitioner was liable to penalty under section 112 ibid. on the basis of the testimony of Shri Shripad Rajaram Chari, the co-accused and on the basis of other evidence on record. 4. The revision application fails and is rejected accordingly.
-
1980 (3) TMI 254 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e statement made by Mr. Talyarkhan that they will give the benefit to the Petitioners of one day taken up in chemical examination plus two working days in addition to 150 days this question also does not require the decision. The judgment given by me on 18th March 1980 stands with the variation that the concession to which the Plaintiff is entitled to will be one day taken up in special examination plus two working days in addition to the graded scale of demurrage about which Mr. Talyarkhan has already made a statement as recorded in my judgment given on 18th March, 1980. 9. Mr. Koticha at the earlier stage also applied for withdrawal of the petition as against the Bombay Port Trust and requested me that on such withdrawal, he should be allowed to proceed with the petition against the other Respondents. I rejected this application as having been made at a belated stage and after I had indicated to him the view I had taken in the judgment already dictated on 18th March, 1980.
-
1980 (3) TMI 253 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d the levy of tax described as property tax by the Bareilly Zila Parishad so as to include tax on trades, callings and professions. Merely because a particular tax or levy bears a .certain name. would not prevent its broader impact by deeming effect if otherwise its levy is within the competence of the legislature or the municipal body. It is correct that the Parliament may not be competent to levy sales-tax on sales effected within a State. However on inter-State sales, such power is clearly available. In the case of the petitioner, overwhelming sales were of inter-State nature. In Hindustan Sugar Mills case (1978 SC 1496), the Supreme Court upheld the levy of sales-tax on sale price which include freight. 5. Subject to these observations, I concur in the overall findings arrived at by my learned brother in allowing these writ petitions in terms of his judgment. This has been in line with the almost consistent approach adopted by different High Courts, and we abide by that.
-
1980 (3) TMI 252 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eral Sales Tax Act, 1958, and the purchases were not liable to be taxed at 1 per cent. It was also held that the ornaments were purchased as bullion and therefore, tax at the rate of 1/2 per cent only could be charged. In our opinion, the Tribunal came to the right conclusion on this point also. Silver ornaments of personal wear falling within entry 2 of Part V of Schedule II, in our opinion, mean such ornaments which are meant for use. In the instant case the ornaments were not sold as ornaments, nor were they purchased as ornaments. The intention in purchasing and selling the ornaments was to purchase and sell silver. 4.. For the reasons given above, we answer the question as follows (1) The Tribunal was right in setting aside the decision to resort to the best judgment assessment. (2) The Tribunal was right in treating the ornaments purchased by the assessee as bullion and in subjecting the same to tax at 1/2 per cent. There will be no order as to costs of this reference.
-
1980 (3) TMI 251 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e is no finding whatsoever of deliberate concealment or intentional filing of a false return. Indeed, there is an implied finding in the statement of case that the assessee was in doubt as to whether conversion of paddy into rice and other grains into dal amounted to manufacture. It is, however, pointed out that the assessee should have adopted the course of showing in the return the figures of purchases with a claim for exemption from purchase tax. This is an advice of prudence. Simply because the assessee was not prudent enough, he cannot be held liable for penalty. 4.. Our answers to the questions referred are as follows (1) The conversion of paddy into rice and other grains into dal amounts to manufacture. (2) The failure of the assessee to disclose in its returns purchases of paddy and other grains of the value of Rs. 8,69,778.71 did not amount to concealment of turnover making it liable for penalty under section 43. There will be no order as to costs of this reference.
-
1980 (3) TMI 250 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... a Britannica, Volume 14, 1972 edition, at page 584, one of the uses of magnesium sulphate is stated thus An increasing use for magnesium oxide and magnesium sulphate is as a fertiliser in Mg. deficient soils, giving increased yields specially with citrus fruits and potatoes. As regards its organic compound it has been stated that magnesium is a constituent of chlorophyll. Apart from what has been stated above, as noted above, the revising authority has found that there was no material on record to indicate that the assessee sold magnesium sulphate either as a chemical or to those who required it as a chemical only and not as fertiliser. In view of the composition and use of magnesium sulphate and further the purpose for which it was sold by the assessee, its outturn was liable to be taxed treating it as a chemical fertiliser and not a chemical of all kinds. The revision hence fails and is dismissed with costs to the assessee which are assessed at Rs. 200. Petition dismissed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 249 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that as the turnover relating to batteries was assessed at a lower rate the assessing authority was justified in reassessing the same under section 19(1) of the Act and that batteries were assessable under entry 1-A of Part II of Schedule II to the Act and was not covered by the M.P. Government notification relied upon by the assessee. 6.. As a result of the discussion aforesaid our answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative and against the assessee. Our answer to question No. (2) is that the reopening of the assessment was not invalid and improper under section 19(1) of the Act on the ground that reopening of the assessment amounted to change of opinion by the assessing authority and our answer to question No. (3) is in the negative and against the assessee. In the circumstances of the case we leave the parties to bear their own costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1980 (3) TMI 248 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... relevant period, was grossly arbitrary and was based on nothing but wild guess-work. The mere reduction of the multiple from 4 to 2 effected by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner does not in any way improve the situation. Unfortunately, none of these crucial aspects has been considered by the Tribunal before it proceeded to confirm the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. We accordingly allow these tax revision cases, set aside the orders passed by the Tribunal in so far as they relate to the determination of the turnover of the assessee in respect of hardware items for the years in question and remit the appeals to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law and in the light of the observations contained in this judgment. It is needless to add that it will be open to the Tribunal to remand the matters to the subordinate authorities, if it so considers necessary. The parties will bear their respective costs. Petitions allowed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 247 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... National Formulary of India, 1966, at page 26, where it is mentioned that water for injection is to be used for parenteral preparations. The nature of the formulation of water has been described. It is not necessary to dilate further and suffice it to say that from these authorities it is clear that water for injection is sterilised distilled water and it is intended for parenteral administration and in other sterile products. In other words, it would be covered by the expression distilled water occurring in clause (a) of section 4 of the Act. The view taken by the revising authority is, therefore, correct and I agree with it. However, in case any circular has been issued by the State Government giving remission of tax, in part or as a whole, on the turnover in respect of distilled water (water for injection), the Sales Tax Officer would give the benefit of the same to the assessee. The revision is hence dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 246 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ee did not fall within the scope of entry 26 of the First Schedule to the Act. 8.. The result that emerges from the foregoing discussion is that no interference is called for by this Court with the order passed by the Tribunal and that these tax revision cases have only to be dismissed. We accordingly dismiss these two tax revision cases and direct that the revision petitioner shall pay the costs of the respondent. Order Immediately after pronouncement of this judgment, the learned Government Pleader prayed for the grant of certificates under article 133(1) of the Constitution for enabling the State to carry these matters in appeal before the Supreme Court. We do not however consider that these are fit cases for the grant of such certificates since no substantial question of law of general importance on which a pronouncement by the Supreme Court can now be said to be necessary is involved. The prayer for the grant of certificates is accordingly declined. Petitions dismissed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 245 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Sales Tax Rules, but must satisfy himself that the goods in respect of which concessional rate is claimed are included in the purchasing dealer s certificate. If he merely obtains the declaration but the goods are not included in the purchasing dealer s certificate, he will not be entitled to the concessional rate. In view of this decision, the question referred to us will be answered in favour of the department. 4.. As a result of the discussion aforesaid, our answer to the question referred to us is that to be able to claim that he should be taxed at the concessional rate, it was the responsibility of the selling dealer to satisfy himself that the goods sold to the purchasing dealer (from whom the selling dealer obtains a certificate in form XII-A) are mentioned in the registration certificate of the purchasing dealer as raw material for manufacture. In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1980 (3) TMI 244 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ber, 1972, is that the firm had continued with a less number of partners than was the case earlier thereto. The provisions in rule 25B provide that the recognition could be cancelled only if the dealer ceased to be a bona fide producer of products of the village industry or contravened any provisions of the Act and the Rules. No such circumstance being in existence in the instant case, the Commissioner was not justified in cancelling the recognition that had been granted by the endorsement dated 23rd June, 1971. In our opinion, the appellant was entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him. Accordingly the writ appeal is allowed. The order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Mysore, Bangalore, dated 10th September, 1973, bearing No. Recg/6909/70-71 is quashed and a direction shall issue that he shall continue the recognition under rule 25B of the Rules which had been granted by the endorsement dated 23rd June, 1971. 9.. Parties shall bear their own costs. Appeal allowed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 243 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ngal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, and so no tax can be imposed on sales of liquor under the said Act. We are unable to accept the contention. Trade or business in liquor may not be trade or business as contemplated by article 19(1)(g) or article 301 of the Constitution, but sale of liquor having all the incidents of sale within the meaning of clause (g) of section 2 of the said Act, we do not find any reason why such sale cannot be chargeable to sales tax. This contention, therefore, fails. No other point has been urged on behalf of either party. For the reasons aforesaid, the judgments appealed from are set aside and the rules nisi are discharged. The appeals are allowed, but there will be no order for costs. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under article 131-A of the Constitution is prayed for on behalf of the respondents, but refused. There will, however, be stay of operation of this judgment for a period of four weeks from date. SHARMA, J.-I agree. Appeals allowed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 242 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... al representative be. This is a degree higher than his position as a mere legal representative. While section 22(1) of the Hyderabad Agricultural Income-tax Act, referred to in the Mysore decision 1968 69 I.T.R. 401 at 419 (F.B.). , fastened the liability of the deceased upon the legal representative, it did not say that the legal representative was deemed to be the deceased himself. That is done only under our section. In the circumstances, the petitioner s counsel s argument that the knowledge of the deceased cannot be ascribed to the legal representative cannot be accepted. Notices of demand had been issued to the deceased, but he had not complied with them and, so the steps taken under section 23 against the petitioner were perfectly in order. 7.. In the circumstances, the challenge against the impugned orders fails and the petitioner is not entitled to claim a refund of the amount already paid by him. The petition is accordingly dismissed. No. costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 241 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... herefore, was to allow exemption to those four metals or to an alloy of any of those metals. The word any , as noted above, certainly means one or more. The dictionary meaning of the word alloy of course is a substance composed of two or more metals or of a metal or metals with a non-metal intimately mixed. That meaning cannot be attributed to the word alloy occurring in this entry because it clearly provides that the alloy should be a substance containing any of these metals only. In my opinion, therefore, this question has been considered fully by two Division Benches of this Court on earlier occasions and there does not appear to be any occasion for reconsideration of the view taken therein. On this view, zinc mazak which includes some foreign substances is not covered by the aforesaid notifications and has been rightly treated as an unclassified item. The revisions hence fail and are dismissed. In the circumstances there will be no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 240 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sales tax at a single point in a series of sales would, very naturally, be to indicate the types of goods each of which would constitute a separate class for a series of sales. Otherwise, the listing itself loses all meaning and would be without any purpose behind it. It is clear, therefore, that the words that is to say occurring in clause (iv) of section 14 of the Central Act were meant to exhaustively enumerate the goods. That being the position, steel tubes which did not figure in that list cannot be treated as iron and steel. Of course, after the substitution of this clause with effect from 1st April, 1973, steel tubes have been included in the given list. The revising authority, thus, erred in treating steel tubes as iron and steel liable to tax at 3 per cent. They have to be treated as mill stores liable to tax at 6 per cent. The revision is hence allowed but, since nobody has appeared for the respondent-assessee, there will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 239 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ame. Hence. while confirming the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee is entitled to exemption from taxation in respect of the sales effected by it in respect of rock phosphate, we set aside the order of the Tribunal and remand the three appeals-T.A. Nos. 823, 824 and 825 of 1977-to the Tribunal for fresh disposal after a de novo determination of the aforesaid question as to whether the varieties of fertilisers sold by the assessee under the names ultrafos, dolomite, peramphos, azo and thomas phosphate are chemical fertilisers falling within the purview of item 54 of the First Schedule. The Tribunal will afford an opportunity to both sides to adduce further documentary evidence in respect of this matter and it will also be at liberty to remit the case for determination to the assessing authority if such a course is considered necessary by the Tribunal. 8.. The tax revision cases are disposed of as above. The parties will bear their respective costs. Ordered accordingly.
-
1980 (3) TMI 238 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is granted by the aforesaid notification. The learned counsel for the department, however, contended that as the assessee had employed servants for preparation of namkin, the goods sold by the assessee would not be exempt from tax as provided by the notification. The contention cannot be upheld. The Board rightly observed that the notification cannot be held to apply only to a self-employed halwai. The notification would also apply to the case of a halwai who got namkin prepared by others on payment of labour charges. The learned counsel for the department was unable to point out any authority to the contrary. 4.. Therefore, our answer to the question referred to us is that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessee will fall under the category of halwai and that the namkin sold by it would be exempt from sales tax under Notification No. 965-V-ST dated 31st March, 1964. Parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1980 (3) TMI 237 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tem opens by saying all kinds of mineral oils thereby indicating that the legislature itself contemplated different kinds of mineral oils. Therefore, when the petitioners purchased the base oil it was one kind of mineral oil which was liable to be taxed under item 47-A and when the petitioners sold the mineral oil after subjecting the same to different processes, as referred to above, they were not selling the mineral oil of the same kind but mineral oil after subjecting it to various chemical and other processes by which the mineral oil purchased by them ceased to be the same and lost its identity and became a different commercial commodity, in other words, another kind of mineral oil. In such a situation, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sales effected by the petitioners were liable to sales tax under item 47-A of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. These tax revision petitions fail and are accordingly dismissed. Petitions dismissed.
-
1980 (3) TMI 236 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... thereunder he may after giving the licensee an opportunity of being heard cancel the licence and assess him to tax in accordance with the provisions of section 14. A copy of the order cancelling the licence shall be communicated to the licensee. In view of the aforesaid provisions, the Sales Tax Officer alone would have jurisdiction to assess the assessee. No provision was brought to our notice which conferred on the Assistant Sales Tax Officer powers of the Sales Tax Officer under rule 5 of the Rules. In our opinion, therefore, the Tribunal was right in holding that under rule 5 of the Rules, only the Sales Tax Officer was competent to assess a dealer when licence granted under section 13 of the Act was cancelled by him for failure to comply with the conditions of the licence. 4.. Our answer to the question referred to us is, therefore, in the affirmative and against the department. Parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
........
|
