|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 699 Records
-
2004 (3) TMI 732 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ting to the cement. For the reasons given hereinabove, we allow writ petition No. 2316 of 2004 and hold that the petitioner was not exigible to entry tax in terms of Andhra Pradesh Tax on Entry of Goods into local Areas Act, 2001 from April 30, 2001 to September 11, 2002 but is however exigible to tax at 4 per cent subsequent to September 12, 2002 when oil well cement was specifically included in the notification issued under section 3 of the Act. Writ Petition No. 2323 of 2004 This writ petition pertains to period from May 2, 2001 to March 31, 2002. This petition is also allowed in view of the orders in W.P. No. 2316 of 2004. Writ Petition No. 2309 of 2004 No orders are needed to be passed in this writ petition, as it has not been pressed by the learned Senior Counsel, and accordingly it is dismissed. In the result, Writ Petitions Nos. 2316 and 2323 of 2004 are allowed and writ petition No. 2309 of 2004 is dismissed. No costs. That rule nisi has been made absolute as above.
-
2004 (3) TMI 731 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... scellaneous application, the petitioner has only prayed for stay of the show-cause notice, without, however, formally assailing the legality and validity of the same. Thus, the pending writ petition has been made the basis for invoking the jurisdiction of the court only for the purpose of making and granting of interim prayer. Be that as it may and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case on which the learned counsel for the parties extensively argued, I am of the considered opinion that the miscellaneous application is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, same is dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the miscellaneous application, the petitioner shall now respond to the show-cause notice issued to them urging the grounds as may be available to them without any further delay and thereafter the matter should be brought to its logical end by the concerned authority in accordance with law. The miscellaneous application shall stand dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 730 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... T Act. 28.. However, since the assessments against the lessee, M/s. Eagle Distillery (P) Ltd., have not been questioned by it and since it has become final, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we direct the assessing authority to proceed first against the said company for realization of the arrears of sales tax due for these two years under both the enactments. After exhausting the steps against the said company, if any amounts are outstanding towards sales tax dues for the aforesaid two years, the assessing authority is entitled to proceed against the petitioner and its assets. However, petitioner is directed to furnish sufficient security for the due payment of the dues in case the said amount cannot be recovered from the lessee as directed above, to the satisfaction of the assessing authority within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 29.. Tax revision cases are disposed of as above. Petitions disposed of.
-
2004 (3) TMI 729 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... vires. 9.. On going through the relevant annexures to the application we find that the petitioner did not exhaust all the forums assailing the order of imposition of penalty. Hence, the application cannot be entertained at this stage on this grounds until and unless all the forums are exhausted. 10.. The seizure, as we find was made on November 6, 2003 and the application has been filed on March 4, 2004, i.e., long after sixty days. Hence, is barred under the provisions of section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987. 11.. However, since the petitioner did not exhaust all the forums against the order of penalty he is given liberty to exhaust all the forums before coming to this Tribunal subject to law of limitation. The application, therefore, cannot be admitted for hearing on merits. The petitioner may, however, come before this Tribunal after exhausting all the appropriate forums. 12.. The application is thus disposed of without costs. Application disposed of.
-
2004 (3) TMI 728 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... der the evidence and render findings though all the relevant materials were before the Tribunal. Their Lordships held, The Tribunal has adopted an easy course of remanding the matter through collector when it could have decided the same. It was further held, To our mind, it appears that the Tribunal has adopted an easy course to remanding the matter. The remand was superfluous when the parties have argued the matter at length . 11.. The aforesaid legal principles, also apply in our view, in the present case. The order of remand passed by the learned Members of the Board is, found to be unjustified and liable to be set aside. The learned Members should dispose of the cases on merits after considering all the relevant materials available on record. 12.. The orders passed by the learned Members of the Board are hereby set aside. 13.. RN-227 of 2001 is also disposed of in view of the findings made above. No order as to costs. A. Deb (Technical Member).-I agree. Petition allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 727 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... , creates considerable confusion and doubt. The subject-matter of exemptions should be made simple and self-contained instead of linking it another enactment which in turn is linked to yet another enactment. Having regard to the fact that textile items not falling under the First Schedule to the ADE Act are only a few and having regard to the fact that textiles are an essential part of daily needs of the citizens, the State may consider exempting all textiles/fabrics instead of restricting the exemptions to the items enumerated in the First Schedule to the ADE Act. This of course is only a suggestion for consideration and not intended to interfere with Government Policy. 16.. For the reasons stated above, we are of the view that the revisional authority was justified in his view that the orders of the appellate authority in the two cases were erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue and consequently reversing them. As a result, these appeals are dismissed. Appeals dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 726 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ity in the exercise of such power. 14.. In fact bona fides of the petitioner is also not fully reliable. This Court while granting stay of recovery proceedings, etc., on September 2, 2002 had put the petitioner on terms. This Court found that even as on November 5, 2003 petitioner had not complied with such a conditional order by depositing the amount directed to be deposited by this Court and as such had vacated the interim order. 15.. The present writ petitions being only against the recovery proceedings and not questioning the correctness or otherwise of the amounts that are sought to be recovered from the petitioner, there is nothing that is required to be examined in these writ petitions as it is found that the authorities are fully justified in having recourse to such proceedings. 16.. In the circumstances no occasion for this Court to issue any writ as sought for in these writ petitions. Writ petitions are dismissed levying cost of Rs. 5,000. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 725 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is appropriate that the petitioner files his reply/objections, whatever he may want to urge, in response to these show cause notices under annexures J1 to J6 before the concerned authority and seek appropriate orders from the very authority. Petitioner is given six weeks time from today for filing such objections before the concerned authority and if there is any development of law in the meanwhile on the aspect of interpretation or the scope of the notification dated August 28, 1993 it is always open to the petitioner to urge such position also before the authority and seek for suitable orders. The authority will have to consider the same in the light of the observation made above. 15.. Accordingly these writ petitions are rejected reserving liberty to the petitioner to file his objections/reply before the authorities concerned within a period of six weeks from today and the authorities to pass appropriate orders on the same in accordance with law. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 724 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 628 of 2000 (Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh) 2003 132 STC 8 2003 UPTC 467. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 10.. In view of the aforesaid discussions, writ petition is allowed. The impugned circular dated August 5, 2000 and the circular dated August 19, 2000 being contrary to the statutory provision of section 4-B(2) (Explanation) for deleting diesel oil from the recognition certificate of the petitioner, are quashed. The respondents are directed to treat the diesel oil which is used by the petitioner in its generators as goods required for use in the manufacture by the petitioner as notified goods. Accordingly a mandamus is issued to the respondents to issue form III-B regularly to the petitioner for the purpose of diesel oil to be used in its diesel generating sets. 11.. The petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 723 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... discussion, we hold that right of appeal is a vested right as it exists on the date of commencement of lis. The lis can be said to commence under the HGST Act on the date when return is filed or is required to be filed. Therefore, the provisions of section 39(5) of the HGST Act would continue to govern the right of appeal vested in the petitioner which is saved in terms of section 4 of the Punjab General Clauses Act (as applicable to State of Haryana). 9.. The returns in all the writ petitions have been filed prior to the amendment of the Act on April 7, 2000. Since lis has commenced prior to the amendment of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, the provisions as it existed prior to the amendment would be applicable. 10.. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Punjab, dated May 27, 2003, is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the findings recorded above. Petitions allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 722 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he law to ask for stay pending his/their case. It is for the appellate authority/revisionary authority to decide whether a case for stay is made out and if so, on what terms and conditions the same should be granted, or on what ground it should be rejected. In either case, the authorities must always ensure deciding of stay matter expeditiously and in accordance with law by passing a reasoned order after granting an adequate opportunity to an aggrieved. 4.. This Court cannot enter into the merits and demerits of the issue involved in the case. It is not called for at this stage, as the same is seized of by departmental but statutory authorities under the Act. 5.. The aforesaid discussion is enough for the authorities to deal with the issue in accordance with law. It is with these observations, I decline to interfere in any of the orders sought to be impugned in this writ and dispose of the writ in limine. Certified copy within three days. Writ petition disposed of in limine.
-
2004 (3) TMI 721 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... High Court in Writ Petition No. 628 of 2000 (Vam Organic Chemicals Limited v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2003 132 STC 8). Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 10.. In view of the aforesaid discussions, writ petition is allowed. The impugned circular dated August 5, 2000, the notices dated September 19, 2000 and August 24, 2000 issued by the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 respectively being contrary to the statutory provision of section 4-B(2) (Explanation) for deleting diesel oil from the recognition certificate of the petitioner, are quashed. The respondents are directed to treat the diesel oil which is used by the petitioner in its generators as goods required for use in the manufacture by the petitioner as notified goods. Accordingly a mandamus is issued to the respondents to issue form III-B regularly to the petitioner for the purchase of diesel oil to be used in its diesel generating sets. 11.. The petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 720 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... The cause of action can be said to be arisen also when an assessee is called upon to furnish return on his failure to do so in terms of the provisions of the old Act. In fact, that is the relevant date as in Vitthalbhai Naranbhai Patel 39 s case 1961 12 STC 219 (SC) AIR 1967 SC 344. 37.. In view of the above discussion, we hold that right of appeal is a vested right as if exists on the date of commencement of lis. The lis can be said to commence under the HGST Act on the date when return is filed or is required to be filed. Therefore, the provisions of section 39(5) of the HGST Act would continue to govern the right of appeal vested in the petitioner which is saved in terms of section 4 of the Punjab General Clauses Act (as applicable to State of Haryana). 38.. Consequently, writ petitions are dismissed with no order as to costs. 39. However, the petitioners are granted four weeks time to comply with the conditions of section 39(5) of the HGST Act. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 719 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... appeal and showing to the appellate authority that the sales are, in fact, not exigible to tax. If such a contention is taken, the appellate authority is under a duty to examine the matter and determine the question whether or not the sales are exigible to tax. There is no question of invoking the doctrine of estoppel. In our opinion, the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes as also the Tribunal have failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in them. The second question therefore has to be answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee. 14.. The revisional authority was not therefore justified in holding that the order of appellate authority was erroneous. Consequently the question whether the order was prejudicial to revenue does not arise. The appeals are therefore allowed. The common order dated January 31, 2001 of the revisional authority is set aside and the order of the appellate authority is restored. Parties to bear their respective costs. Appeals allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 718 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... igital printing is a "works contract" and not a "service contract", even if it involves highly skilled work and professional and technical expertise. Even if the value of material used in such a works contract is a small percentage of the total cost, and even if the service element is the dominant element, having regard to the decisions in Builders Association of India 1989 73 STC 370 (SC); and ACC 2001 124 STC 59 (SC), the value of the material used in digital printing contract will be exigible to tax. Further the value of vinyl film and the chemicals/inks used for printing forms not a negligible part, but a perceptible part of the price for the works contract. Be that as it may. 8.. The authority has merely followed the principle enunciated in ACC 2001 124 STC 59 (SC). There is no error in the order of the authority. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Learned Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within six weeks. Appeal dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 717 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on account of heavy congestion in the court. 3.. After having heard learned counsel for appellant and after perusal of record, we are of the opinion that against such an interim order, L.P.A. cannot be entertained. If appellant was keen to have an order of stay in his favour then direction as contained in the order should have been complied with. But, that does not give a right to appellant to approach this Court under Clause X of Letters Patent. We find no illegality, perversity in the impugned order passed by learned single Judge. Appeal being devoid of any merit and substance, same is accordingly hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 716 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... o costs. Consequently, WPMP. No. 44856 of 2002 is closed. April 16, 2004 (A.S. Venkatachalamoorthy and P.K. Misra, JJ.) At the request of the petitioner, the matter has been posted today for being mentioned . The petitioner has filed an affidavit dated March 14, 2004 that the industry is facing a crisis and he is not able to pay the amount due to the taxation department and requests that some time may be granted to make the payment. In the affidavit dated nil April, 2004, he has given an undertaking that he would pay whatever tax due to the department and the same may be permitted to be paid in instalments. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Department. On consideration of the entire matter, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to pay the tax amount due in two equal monthly instalments. 50 per cent of such amount shall be paid on or before 15th of May, 2004 and the remaining by 15th of June, 2004. Writ petition dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 715 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ound by the Tribunal arises for decision in addition to the other interlinked questions as formulated. Counsel for the respondent submitted that the Tribunal has followed the view of the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal and the Petition for Special Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court against the decision of the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal, was rejected by the Supreme Court and in that situation, there is no warrant for compelling a reference as prayed for. On considering the relevant facts in the light of the arguments raised before us and noticing the reasons stated in its decision by the Tribunal, we are of the view that the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal should be compelled to refer to this Court the questions as formulated above for decision. We, therefore, allow this application and direct the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata to refer the above questions to this Court in terms of Section 35(H) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
-
2004 (3) TMI 714 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nt, which reads as under, Sec.2(ab) Crossing customs frontiers of India means crossing the limits of the area of a customs station in which imported goods or exported goods are ordinarily kept before clearance by customs authorities. As could be seen from para 5 of the said Judgment, the only question required to be considered in that case was as to whether the sale effected by transfer of documents of title to the goods was made before or after the goods had crossed the customs frontiers of India. As a matter of fact, in that case, the goods were in the bonded warehouse. The Court ruled that taxable event occurs when the customs barrier is crossed and in the case of goods which are in the warehouse, the Customs barriers would be crossed when they are sought to be taken out of the customs and brought to the mass of goods in the country. 10. For the foregoing reasons, this court is of the view that there are no merits in the writ petitions and the same are dismissed. No costs.
-
2004 (3) TMI 713 - SUPREME COURT
Whether ‘kattha’ and ‘cutch’ are forest produce within the meaning of Section 2(4) of the Act?
whether confiscation proceeding can be initiated under Section 52 of the Act only after launching of criminal prosecution or it is open to the Forest Authorities upon seizure of forest produce to initiate both or either?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The stock of cutch was seized in the year 1991, but no confiscation proceeding has been initiated as yet, the revision application arising out of the confiscation proceeding relating to the kattha seized was withdrawn more than eight years ago on 1.11.1995, the same having become infructuous in view of the impugned judgment and criminal prosecution has not been launched so far pursuant to seizure of the stock of kattha and cutch.
............
|
