|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 2242 Records
-
1982 (12) TMI 171 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ction 9 itself. There is thus no option but to hold that the notification, which is a composite one, is ultra vires of section 9 of the Act and is hereby struck down. 13.. It is common ground that the impugned assessment orders are appealable. However, the challenge to the very validity of the notification was obviously beyond the scope of the appellate authority and consequently, we have entertained the writ petitions taking into consideration the admitted position that the assessment orders patently rested inter alia on the notification which was sought to be frontally assailed. As a necessary consequence of the quashing of the notification, the assessment orders are also set aside. This, however, would in no way preclude the Assessing Authority to reassess the matter ignoring altogether the provisions of the impugned notification. 14.. The writ petitions are allowed, but in view of the somewhat intricate legal issues involved, the parties are left to bear their own costs.
-
1982 (12) TMI 170 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e learned Board may entertain the same complying with the provisions of regulation 17 and hearing the parties. The learned Board shall undoubtedly take into consideration the decisions in Commissioner of Taxes, Assam v. Prabhat Marketing Co. Ltd. 1967 19 STC 84 (SC) AIR 1967 SC 602, Hyderabad Deccan Cigarette Factory v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1966 17 STC 624 (SC), Sewlal Hazarimal v. Commissioner of Taxes, Assam 1979 Tax LR 767 and The Martand Dairy and Farm v. Union of India 1975 35 STC 629 (SC) 1975 UJ (SC) 431. We are confident that the Board of Revenue will also take into consideration the provisions of section 2(12) and 2(13) of the Assam Sales Tax Act and decide the appeals on merits. We answer question No. (1) accordingly. 9.. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Assam Board of Revenue under the seal of the Court and signature of the Registrar. The learned Board of Revenue shall, on receipt of the copy of the judgment, order disposal of the appeals accordingly.
-
1982 (12) TMI 169 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n the course of its activity. This decision was followed by another Bench of this Court in Board of Trustees of Visakhapatnam Port Trust v. Commercial Tax Officer 1979 43 STC 36. In the case of Visakhapatnam Port Trust 1979 43 STC 36, the main thrust of this judgment, of course, is that having regard to the statutory objects for achieving which the Visakhapatnam Port Trust was established it cannot be said to be a dealer. For the above reasons, we hold that the transactions effected by the asseseee in its canteen being an inseparable and integral part of its main activity, which admittedly does not amount to business, as defined in sub-clause (i) of clause (bbb) of section 2(1), cannot be brought to tax under the A.P. General Sales Tax Act. The main activity not being a business, the petitioner herein cannot be called a dealer. Accordingly, these tax revision cases are allowed but in the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 500 consolidated.
-
1982 (12) TMI 168 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tic of the assessing authority in this case of taking the purchase value and adding to it the value of the quantity lost in driage or in the manufacturing process is only an estimated substitute for the actual purchase consideration. Even as there is no provision in the Act making allowances for driage or wastage in the manufacturing process of a commodity which is taxable at purchase point, even so, there cannot be an estimated allowance for driage or wastage in cases where purchase value has perforce to be estimated in the absence of correct data or figures in the assessees accounts. In these circumstances, we must uphold the decision of the Board as based on a correct understanding of the scheme of purchase tax in regard to cotton and also the formula used in estimating the purchase value in cases where there are no correct data or materials provided by the assessees for arriving at the purchase value. The appeals are dismissed with costs (one set). Counsel s fee Rs. 250.
-
1982 (12) TMI 167 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sel for the department brings to our notice explanation 4 to the First Schedule to the Act which says that the expression colours in item 45 of the First Schedule does not include dyes and chemicals . The question would arise whether the goods concerned here are chemicals or not. These are all the aspects which have to be decided after gathering the requisite factual basis. In the absence of any such factual basis we are not inclined to allow the counsel to raise this question for the first time in this revision case. It may be noted that under section 22 of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, this Court can interfere only on two grounds, namely, that the Tribunal has decided a question of law erroneously or has failed to decide a question of law. When this alternative contention was not at all raised before the Tribunal, we cannot hold that it has failed to decide that question. The tax revision case accordingly fails and is dismissed, but without costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1982 (12) TMI 166 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... issioner (Judicial). Coming to the question as to whether a single member was competent to dispose of the stay application, it will be seen that under section 10(11) of the Act, it is provided as follows The place of sitting and procedure of, and the manner of presenting appeals and other documents to the Tribunal shall, subject to the rules, be such as the Tribunal may deem fit to adopt. The disposal of a stay application in a pending appeal is a matter of procedure and the Tribunal has thought fit to adopt a procedure wherein a single member of the Tribunal is competent to dispose of an application for stay against an order of remand. The procedure which had been adopted by the Tribunal cannot be said to be contrary either to the section or the Rules. The net result is that it must be held that a single member who rejected the stay application by the Commissioner was competent to do so. In the result, the revision fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (12) TMI 165 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... says that forms I are now ready with the petitioners and if an opportunity is given they will file those forms before the authority forthwith. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case where an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to produce forms I before the first assessing authority. The tax revision cases are accordingly allowed, and the matter is remitted to the first assessing authority who shall receive forms I, if they are produced by the petitioners within seven days of the receipt of notice to be sent by the first assessing authority calling upon the petitioners to produce the said forms. The petitioners shall not be entitled to any further time than what is stipulated hereinabove. If forms I are produced within the said time, they may be taken into consideration and appropriate orders passed according to law. The tax revision cases are allowed to the extent indicated. No order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 400 consolidated.
-
1982 (12) TMI 164 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... m acting upon the notices at annexures A and B. The 1st respondent is the Collector of Bombay who apparently issued the certificate for collection of sales tax arrears alleged to be due by the petitioners under the Bombay Sales Tax Act. 2.. Sri Shivaram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, has strenuously urged that this Court should examine the validity of the certificate issued by the 1st respondent. I am unable to accede to that because the entire cause of action has accrued in the State of Maharashtra where the certificate in respect of the petitioners has originated. If they have any defence, legal or otherwise, in regard to the certificate issued for collection that can only be quashed by the High Court of judicature at Bombay and not by this Court which cannot exercise any extra-territorial jurisdiction to examine actions taken by other States. 3.. In these circumstances the petitioners may approach the proper forum for remedy. These petitions are rejected.
-
1982 (12) TMI 163 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ourse, Central sales tax has been otherwise shown to have been deducted from the aggregate of the sale price, there is no occasion for applying the formula. This is not a case where we are adding any words or reading any words of our own into the statute. Even in the case of a taxing statute, as in the case of any other statute, the object of interpretation is to find out the intention of the Parliament or the legislature, as the case may be, having regard to the language employed. Judged from this angle, we see no ground to accept the interpretation urged by Mr. Dasaratharama Reddi. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in holding that inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to prove that the turnover of Rs. 76,71,405.75 includes Central sales tax, the formula contained in section 8A cannot be applied. For the above reasons, this tax revision case fails and is accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1982 (12) TMI 162 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of the godown and had made a mistake in the application for registration by not mentioning it. It was found that the assessee had mentioned the godown in the stock register and had mentioned the same in his application to the Regional Food Controller. In view of the finding of the Tribunal that there was no intention to mislead the department and there was a bona fide mistake on the part of the assessee, the revision cannot succeed. Mere non-mentioning of the godown will not attract a penalty unless there is in existence some other circumstances indicating on the part of the assessee an intention to evade the law. In the result, the revision is dismissed with costs which are assessed at Rs. 200.
-
1982 (12) TMI 161 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... given and explanation of the assessee taken into consideration before the imposition of the modest penalty. I see no force in this appeal and accordingly reject it. From the aforesaid observations, it is quite evident that no irrelevant consideration has prevailed with the Tribunal. The plea of the petitioner that quarterly returns were filed corresponding to the calendar year instead of the financial year, has rightly been rejected. There is no gainsaying that from the very beginning the petitioner has been filing quarterly returns corresponding to the financial year. As earlier observed, the Tribunal was justified, in the circumstances of the case, to have negatived the plea of the petitioner that sufficient cause existed for the short deposit of the purchase tax for the 3rd quarter. In this view of the matter, the question posed for our decision is answered against the assessee. However, in the circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs. TEWATIA, J.-I agree.
-
1982 (12) TMI 160 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ctrical goods . It is the intrinsic nature and the purpose for which a tool is used, which would, in our opinion, determine its nature. No doubt the case related to an assessee belonging to the State of Haryana, but the Act was applicable to the territories of Haryana also. It is clear from the above decision also that monoblock pumping set does not fall within the definition of electrical goods , simply because an electric motor is attached to the centrifugal pump. In fact the electric motor is an integral part of the centrifugal pump. They are assembled on one block fitted with a common shaft. This leads to greater efficiency, more water and lesser repair charges. The State has not placed any material on the file to support its contention that monoblock pumping set is not a centrifugal pump. We find no merit in these Letters Patent appeals (Nos. 246, 247, 248, 249, 250 and 346 of 1980) and the same are dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 200. SANDHAWALIA, C.J.-I agree.
-
1982 (12) TMI 159 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... may disturb the functioning of these oil glands and excessive oiliness, or a lack of natural oil, may result. For excessive oiliness, astringent lotions and tonics are used, and these should be applied directly to the scalp (with a medicine dropper or a swab of absorbent cotton) and massaged into the scalp. For dry hair, ointments and pomades are used, which serve to supply the lack of natural lubrication in the scalp. The meaning given for lotion in these books shows that lotion is a medicinal preparation applied externally for skin disorders. Hair-dye is a coloring material and it is used for beautification to blacken the gray hair. It is not used as a medicinal preparation to cleanse the hair or for skin disorders. Therefore, we hold that hair-dye is not hair lotion within the meaning of entry 36 of the-Act. Consequently we set aside the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. Accordingly, the tax revision case is allowed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1982 (12) TMI 158 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... a is no more elaborate than the process by which rice is converted into parched rice and puffed rice. If parched rice and puffed rice fall within the meaning of the expression rice in entry 66, there is no reason why ravva should not also similarly fall within that expression. In our opinion, the said decision of the Supreme Court squarely governs the present case. We must accordingly, hold that the Tribunal was right in holding that rice ravva is rice , and therefore, the sale of ravva constitutes second sale, and is exempt from tax. We may also observe that the question now at issue was not directly considered by the Bench of this Court in Udata Narasimha Rao and Company v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1982 51 STC 126. The Bench dealt with the situation obtaining after the aforesaid Amendment Act hence the said decision is of no help to the department. For the above reasons, these tax revision cases fail and are, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250 in each.
-
1982 (12) TMI 157 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to the nature of the goods itself, cannot form the basis for the exercise of the power under that provision. In this view of the matter, while we hold that the power under section 14(4)(cc) of the Act, could be exercised with reference to any order of assessment made on or after 17th January, 1978, inasmuch as the conditions precedent for the exercise of that power are not existing in the instant cases, the show cause notices issued by the respondent, cannot be sustained and they are accordingly quashed. W.P. Nos. 5732 and 5374 of 1979 are accordingly allowed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150 in each. So far as the other two writ petitions W.P. Nos. 6666 and 6673 of 1982 are concerned, for the reasons stated above we hold that the turnover relating to the sale of pillow cases is not exempt from tax under item 5 of the Fourth Schedule and is not covered by item 87 of the First Schedule. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150 in each.
-
1982 (12) TMI 156 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... said amount. Indeed, the removal of abnus leaves without paying the collection charges to the Government would be illegal and unauthorised. In any event, as we have pointed out earlier, the agent to whom the petitioner paid the collection charges is equally the agent of the Government and therefore, the payment constitutes a payment to the Government. The case in McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer 1977 39 STC 151 (SC) was an altogether different case, where the excise duty on liquor was directly remitted by the purchaser into the Government treasury, and the liquor was removed from the manufacturer s godown on paying the price of the liquor. In these facts, the Supreme Court held that the excise duty does not form part of the turnover of the manufacturer. For the above reasons, these tax revision cases fail and are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Advocate s fees Rs. 125 in each tax revision case.
-
1982 (12) TMI 155 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... g an unfair and unintended benefit upon the petitioners. Having failed in the writ petitions and in the appeals before the Supreme Court, the petitioners cannot still claim any immunity under the interlocutory orders made in such writ petitions/appeals. This Court and the Supreme Court having found no merit in the petitions and appeals and having dismissed them in toto, could not have intended to confer any partial or incidental benefit upon the petitioners. Once the main cases are dismissed, the petitioners cannot find any rights or claim, any immunity from the statutory obligations by virtue of or on account of the interlocutory orders made in such cases. Having failed before the courts in toto the petitioners cannot yet claim some partial success, because interlocutory orders cannot stand apart from or higher than the orders in the main cases. For the above reasons, the tax revision cases fail and are accordingly dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 2,000 consolidated.
-
1982 (12) TMI 154 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... od at the relevant time, is not at all applicable in the instant case. The proper period of limitation is the one prescribed by subsection (3) of section 20, and admittedly, the order has been passed within the period of limitation prescribed by section 20(3). Mr. Dasaratharama Reddi then contended that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee must be now given an opportunity to apply for rebate as contemplated by entry 8 to the Second Schedule, as it stood at the relevant time, and the relevant rules in that behalf. We feel that such a course must be left open to the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case. We therefore observe that it shall be open to the petitioner to apply to the assessing authority for rebate in accordance with law and if and when such application is made, the same shall be considered on merits and in accordance with law. The T.R.C. is accordingly dismissed, subject to the above observations. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1982 (12) TMI 153 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... right or wrong, had become final, and as we have observed above, if the department was aggrieved with it, it could have either filed an appeal before the Tribunal, or the appropriate authority could have revised the same according to law. Not having done that, it is not open to the department at this stage to ignore the said order. We may also mention that the decision of this Court in Nabi Oil Mills v. Commercial Tax Officer 1977 40 STC 118 clearly accords with our view. In view of our above finding, it is not necessary to consider the second contention urged by Mr. Dasaratharama Reddi that, as a fact, the sales in question are sales in the course of export. The tax revision case is, accordingly, allowed but, in the circumstances, without costs. The order of the Commercial Tax Officer dated 15th March, 1976, is set aside. He shall now implement, and take steps in accordance with the directions contained in the appellate order dated 23rd March, 1974. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1982 (12) TMI 152 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tton fabrics , as set out in item 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, which has to be imported into the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, by virtue of the explanation to the Fourth Schedule to the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, was not brought to the notice of the learned judge. In view of the fact that entry 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act specifically includes cotton fabrics coated with cellulose derivatives or other artificial plastic materials, within the meaning of the expression cotton fabrics , and because this important aspect was not noticed by this Court while dismissing the said T.R.C. at the admission stage, we are of the opinion that the said order cannot be treated as a binding decision. For the above reasons, these tax revision cases are allowed, and it is held that buckram collars fall within entry 5 of the Fourth Schedule to the A.P. General Sales Tax Act. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250 in each.
........
|
