|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 5386 Records
-
1998 (12) TMI 602 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... adding the words agarbathis and other scented sticks after the words raw bathis . Under clause 1(2) of the Ordinance, sub-clause (d) of clause 6 was given retrospective operation with effect from April 1, 1984. Subsequently the Ordinance was replaced by the Amending Act. The retrospectivity was challenged by another assessee in State of Kerala v. Lissey James 1997 KLJ (Tax Cases) 213 and the contentions of the assessee were repelled. Retrospectivity was upheld as reasonable and constitutional. 4.. In view of the Amending Act, it is manifest that the expression raw bathis occurring in entry 80B will cover agarbathis liable to tax at the rate of 10 per cent. Substituted w.e.f. July 1, 1987 by Act 18 of 1987. 5.. For the above reasons we agree with the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that the Appellate Tribunal was in error in holding that agarbathis are liable to tax as an unclassified item. In the result, the T.R.C. succeeds and is allowed. Petition allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 601 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rities shall withhold their hands for recovering any of the amount remaining due from the respective petitioners, under the orders under challenge. 17.. For all the reasons, we reject the claim of the petitioners that in the absence of any fresh rules made under section 5-A or section 24(2)(aa)(c) and (h) no penalty or interest could be levied and collected from the petitioners and the writ petitions fail and shall stand rejected, subject to the directions given by us to the taxing authorities concerned in all these cases to review and reconsider the quantum of penalty or interest in the light of the principles laid down by us as to the time-limit within which the obligation to submit the return and pay the tax is fixed with the petitioners and pass revised or confirmatory orders in the light of the directions issued. 18.. CMP No. 1099 of 1998 in CWP No. 555 of 1998. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the present application is dismissed. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 600 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... enue sought to argue that in spite of Tribunal taking contrary view in Brooke Bond s case, the assessee did not file revised return to surrender the tax payable on chicory roots suggesting that returns were not bona fide. Suffice it to say that the fact that Tribunal, which is not a final authority on question of law, has subsequently taken a contrary view of its earlier view, does not oblige an assessee to abandon his claim to exemption or relief, even in his own case, much less a decision given in other assessee s case. 10.. As a result, this petition succeeds. The impugned order (annexure A/15) dated October 29, 1982 extending period of limitation for completing assessment for the periods January 1, 1975 to December 31, 1979 is quashed and the assessment orders, if any, made as a result of interim order passed by this Court on July 24, 1991 which has been subject to decision of this petition, shall also stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 599 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... resales of goods purchased from such purchaser. 4.. If the certificate is cancelled prospectively the provisions of section 15 would operate and provisos (a) and (b) of section 30AA would not be operative. 5.. Irrespective of the fact whether the registration certificate of the vendor or purchaser is cancelled retrospectively, the genuineness of the transactions has to be verified at the time of assessment/ reassessment. If transactions are found genuine, they will not be affected by section 30AA and provisos thereto. 3.. In view of the clear stand taken by the State Government that if transactions are found to be genuine they will not be affected by section 30AA and provisos thereto, the issue really does not survive between the parties at this stage. 4.. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners do not press for the petitions, at this stage. Petitioners are accordingly dismissed. Rule discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 598 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he true meaning of same term expressed in later notification, particularly when the literal construction in the background of scheme gives rise to apparent dichotomy noticed by us casting doubt about its true meaning. The expression launching of new product line supports the conclusion to which we have reached, to correlate the diversification in some way with the line of product of existing project or projects. 13.. If viewed in that light, there is no dichotomy left in the expression expansion and diversification in giving effect to the term new industry defined in clause (b) of annexure II to entry 175 in the notification under section 49(2) of the Act. In this connection one must keep in mind that once it is established that an assessee is entitled to exemption in interpreting the scheme it should be given full effect to. 14.. As a result, we allow this petition, quash the impugned order dated December 23, 1997. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Petition allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 597 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... nd did the billing. The goods in question thereupon moved directly from the factory to the purchaser in Delhi in fulfilment of the order. The presence of the bills issued by the Delhi office with the salesman can have no other explanation. At any rate the dealer was not able to provide any other more plausible explanation. In the circumstances the AA had no option but to take the transactions in question to be inter-State sales exigible to tax under the CST Act in Rajasthan and tax them accordingly and for seeking to show them as branch transfers, impose penalty. 14.. All in all the dealer was not able to discharge the burden of proof placed on it by law to show that the transactions in question were not liable to be taxed under the CST Act as inter-State sales. The Board cannot, therefore, be said to have determined the matter correctly. 15.. The application for revision is accepted and the impugned order of the Board is set aside. No order as to costs. Application allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 596 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ck than what is provided under the exemption provision itself. 10.. The clear result of giving effect to rule 50(ii) as suggested by the assessee by considering the sales made by the assessee, which is bereft of any element of tax liability, as gross turnover having element of tax liability embedded therein and to apply the formula of net taxable turnover, shall be in extending the limit of exemption from payment of tax from what has been determined under the provision, and to read into the scheme that the dealer shall be exempt from payment of tax on gross turnover of maximum limit instead of exempt from payment of tax up to certain amount. 11.. The contention is contrary to all cannon of interpreting the statutory provisions and we are unable to accept the same. 12.. As a result, we answer the question referred to us in affirmative, that is to say, in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. There shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1998 (12) TMI 595 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... ace of the last known business place or residential place. Admittedly the Revenue had not taken steps to send the notice by registered post. The notice was taken to the place of business and as it was closed it was affixed. The respondent had not complied with the sub-clause (c) to rule 52. We feel there is non-compliance of the rule by the Revenue for which the assessment order is not sustainable. For these reasons the order of assessment is set aside and the Revenue is directed to issue a fresh notice to the address given in this original petition by registered post and if he could not be served, then to take up the mode of affixture. After giving opportunity to file objections, the assessment order may be passed. The O.P. is allowed. And this Tribunal doth further order that this order on being produced be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal on the 23rd day of December, 1998. Petition allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 594 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... g further in the matter after the stay order comes to their knowledge. In the instant case, it is quite apparent that the order of penalty was passed before this Court s stay order was communicated to the concerned authority. The perusal of the penalty order clearly indicates that the petitioner has been making applications for adjournment before the assessing authority from time to time and on August 2, 1998 also, it made an application for adjournment on the ground that his counsel has gone out of station. The record does not disclose that the authority concerned was ever informed about the interim order dated August 2, 1989 passed by this Court before the order imposing penalty was passed. 11.. The second ground of attack is the same which has been dealt with while dealing with the challenge to the impugned notice. For the reason given above, this submission is also rejected. 12.. This writ petition is dismissed. No costs. A.K. PRASAD, J.-I agree. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 593 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Tax Act, 1957 as entry 141 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, relates to all kinds of welding electrodes and rods. The Tribunal also held that these items fall under entry 83 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as parts of the machinery. We do not see any infirmity in the order of the Tribunal and hence the tax revision case is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 592 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ner when he effected the supply, was service. 9.. The net result of the decision of the honourable B.N. Sapru, J., was that sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Forty-sixth Amendment of the Constitution was held not to applicable to the U.P. Sales Tax Act. 20.. It was after the decision of this Court in Northern India Hotels case 1984 55 STC 68 that the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1985 (U.P. Act No. 25 of 1985) was amended and it is clear that the State of U.P. did not want to reopen the issues for the period prior to February 3, 1983. 21.. In the present matters all the assessments are for the periods prior to February 3, 1983 and, therefore, during those assessment years receipts on account of supply of food and beverages by way of rendering of services were not taxable. The Tribunal s orders, therefore, are in accordance with law and these revision petitions deserve to be dismissed. The revision petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. Petitions dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 591 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... d of by this judgment, there will be direction that such stay orders will continue until orders are passed by STAT under the guidelines issued in this judgment or until January 31, 1999 whichever is earlier. It is for the parties to move the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and to see if orders could be obtained under the guidelines issued in this judgment. If the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal passes orders in the stay petitions in accordance with this judgment, then that order of Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal alone will govern the parties and not the interim orders of the High Court or Special Tribunal. If the parties do not get orders by January 31, 1999, the interim orders granted by the High Court and Special Tribunal shall stand vacated. And this tribunal doth further order that this order on being produced be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal on the 18th day of December, 1998. Petitions allowed
-
1998 (12) TMI 590 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t with the exchange. Had it not been so, the rentals would not have been different for different exchanges, because the instrument used by the consumers can always be the same. Besides, rule 434 gives an exemption of having one s own instrument and if a consumer has his own instrument installed no doubt he gets a rebate for the installation charges, for rentals he will not be getting any rebate whatsoever. 23.. For these reasons, we find that by installing a telephone there is no transfer of goods from the Telephones Department to the consumer for any consideration whatsoever and also we find that the rentals are not charged for the telephone instrument as such, therefore the rentals are not subject to sales tax within the meaning of provisions of A.P. General Sales Tax Act. 24.. Therefore, these writ petitions are allowed, the demand notices, assessment orders and the consequential orders passed in appeals/revisions are quashed. No order as to costs. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 589 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... can prefer revision petition to determine whether his case attracts penalty of penal interest on the facts of the case. Thus, reserving the right of filing revision, the petition is dismissed. 81.. In fine, except O.P. No. 3818 of 1997 and O.P. No. 20 of 1998 which are allowed as indicated supra, other petitions are dismissed. The petitioners are at liberty to prefer revision petitions wherever the statutory remedy has not been exhausted. The time spent in pursuing the transfer petition/original petition before the High Court and this Special Tribunal shall be deducted in calculating the time for filing revision petitions. Original papers if any, shall be returned. The O.Ps. and T.Ps. are disposed of in the above terms. And this Tribunal doth further order that this order on being produced be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal on the 23rd day of December, 1998. Petitions disposed of accordingly.
-
1998 (12) TMI 588 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rom encrustation of the grains........ It is also evident from the above clauses that if there is any objection from the Food Corporation or the purchase officer with regard to the rice sold as not conforming to the specifications, then the miller or the dealer can take back the rice, clean and repolish and bring back to sell the same to the said officers. Thus there is scope for bargaining and negotiations between the rice miller or the dealer and the Food Corporation or the purchase officer, as the case may be, with regard to the sale of rice though they are under obligation under clauses 3 and 4 to sell 50 per cent of the milled rice at the procurement price. Therefore, in view of the principle laid down in Vishnu Agencies s case 1978 42 STC 31 (SC), it amounts to sale as defined under section 2(n) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 and the charging section is section 5 of the said Act. Thus there is no merit in the writ petitions. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 587 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... hich includes video films, the sound track and any work produced by any process analogous to cinematography. Therefore, as long as the exhibition of films by video cassette recorders amounts to entertainment within the meaning of the Act of 1939, the petitioners cannot escape or avoid the liability to pay entertainment tax under the Act of 1939. 18.. In view of the above, the writ petitions are devoid of merits and are dismissed. No costs. 19.. At this stage, the leaned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since the writ petitions were pending, they could not exercise the option under section 5 of the Act of 1939. Therefore, they may be permitted to exercise the option as per Rules under the Act at this stage. We direct the Entertainment Tax Officer to consider the case of the petitioners for exercising option under section 5 of the Act of 1939, if permissible, without any reference to the period of limitation up to the financial year 1998-99. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 586 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eedings under this section. 27.. A bare perusal of the provision makes it clear that in the face of undisputed facts and in the light of averments, clause (a) of section 44 is not attracted and at best the case may come under clause (b). Reassessment proceedings for financial years 1990-91 and 1991-92 initiated after expiry of five years from the end of these periods on March 20, 1998 is without jurisdiction also on the ground that the same are barred by time. 28.. As a result of the aforesaid conclusion, we have no hesitation in upholding the challenge to the impugned notices annexures A/3(1) to A/3(5) respectively. 29.. Accordingly this petition succeeds. The impugned order under section 59(4) (annexure A/2) dated March 9, 1998 and impugned notices annexures A/3(1) to A/3(5) dated March 20, 1998 for the assessment periods 1990-91 to 1994-95 are quashed. Rule is made absolute. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 585 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... more than one interpretation was possible in taxation matters the interpretation more favourable to the assessee should be adopted. 13.. This kind of dual use is not peculiar to coconut oil. Most edible oils have such dual or multiple uses. They continued none the less to be edible oil. In this view of the matter the kind or size of the packing does not alter the nature or character of the goods. By being packed in small containers it does not cease to be edible. 14.. Therefore the rates of tax applicable to the sales of refined coconut oil as refined coconut oil and not as hair oil is 4 per cent. The petitioner admittedly collected and deposited the tax at this rate on the sales of refined coconut oil. It cannot therefore be said that the petitioner was guilty of evasion of tax. The exercise of the jurisdiction by the ACTO, AE was therefore irregular. 15.. The application is allowed. The impugned notices are quashed and set aside. No order as to costs. Application allowed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 584 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed with the proof or that there are no requisite documents, a reasoned order should be passed by him keeping in view the clarification given above and be served on the petitioners representative or driver-in-charge of the vehicle without any delay. This is, however, subject to the condition that the petitioners produce the proof of registration as dealers. We consider it necessary to incorporate this direction for the reason that in the absence of registration, it would be difficult to keep track of the transactions of the dealers concerned. As regards the tax already collected, it is open to the petitioners to file applications for refund before the concerned assessing officer. Such applications for refund shall be disposed of expeditiously and it is open to the department to make the adjustment of tax refundable against the taxes if any due from the petitioners. 7.. With these directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Writ petitions disposed of accordingly.
-
1998 (12) TMI 583 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ring the appeals belatedly and the appellate authority ought to have rejected such appeals in limine. 9.. For the reasons stated above, we have come to the inevitable conclusion that the appellate authority was not legally justified in condoning long and inordinate delay, that too by a cryptic order and consequentially the appellate order passed on merits granting the relief to the appellant is vitiated by illegality and hence liable to be set aside. The action taken by the Commissioner is, therefore, in conformity with law, though for somewhat different reasons. 10.. Appeal Nos. 36, 50, 51 and 52 of 1998 are, therefore, dismissed. No costs. 11.. As far as Appeal Nos. 38 and 44 of 1998 are concerned, for the same reasons stated in Special Appeal No. 34 of 1998 and batch, the revision is timebarred. Hence, the impugned orders of the Commissioner for the years 1990-91 and 1991-92 cannot be sustained. The two appeals are accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
........
|
