|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 365 Records
-
1995 (2) TMI 380 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ce-wise. It is common knowledge that the cost of production of small-scale units is higher than that of large scale or medium scale units. The small-scale units would be placed in a disadvantageous position in marketing their high cost products if sales tax is also added to the price of those products. Because of the exemption from sales tax, in a sellers market, i.e., when demand is high, the small-scale units will have the advantage of increasing the price of their products without the burden of sales tax and in a buyers market they can market their products better by reducing the price to the extent possible below the price of the products of medium and large scale units burdened with sales tax. These are not mean advantages. What incentives are to be given and to what extent and to whom are all matters of policy and that is beyond our pale. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions and accordingly they are dismissed. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 379 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Rolling Shutters and Steel Works 1977 39 STC 372, Sentinel Rolling Shutters and Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. 1978 42 STC 409 and Ram Singh and Sons Engineering Works 1979 43 STC 195, fully applies to the case before us. The nature of the transaction in the instant case is in no way different than the transaction of supply of fabrication and installation of bottle cooling plant in Richardson and Cruddas Ltd. 1968 21 STC 245 (SC) and the contract for fabrication and erection of 3-motion electrical overhead travelling crane in Ram Singh and Sons Engineering Works 1979 43 STC 195 (SC). Accordingly, we hold that the contract for supply, erection and installation of plastic machinery in the present case is a works contract and not a contract for sale. 10.. In view of the above, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. 11.. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 378 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... aken against the petitioners for furnishing false informations to the authority concerned, but surprisingly enough this was also not done. Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court, in arriving at the conclusions under the two impugned orders dated November 29, 1991 and June 3, 1992 contained in annexures 7 and 11 respectively to the writ petition the authority concerned has not applied its mind and thus the same cannot be allowed to stand. Consequently, from the aforesaid discussion, both the impugned orders dated November 29, 1991 and June 3, 1992 contained in annexures 7 and 11 respectively to the writ petition are hereby set aside and the case is remanded to the Divisional Level Committee (respondent No. 2) with a direction to investigate into the matter afresh and to pass a speaking order within three months from the date of producing the certified copy of this order before it after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. Matter remanded.
-
1995 (2) TMI 377 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to the sale of goods by the dealer. It is now related to the rate specified in the Schedule against the goods packed. Whether the goods packed are not taxable in a given transaction of sale or are taxable at a lower rate than the rate specified in the Schedule, would be no more relevant in deciding the rate of tax applicable to packing material in which it is packed under the amended section 15A. 7.. In view of the above, we are of the clear opinion that the Tribunal was not correct in holding that sales tax was payable on the tins used for packing of oil, at the rate specified in Schedule C to sales of oil, when admittedly no tax was payable on the sales of oil effected by the assessee in the instant case, which was packed in such packing material. 8. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 9.. In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 376 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of the receipts in respect of the service of food in the various eating rooms of the assessee s hotel was liable to tax. We do not find any base whatsoever of the contention of the assessee that there were two implied contracts, one for environment and amenities and other for food. This claim of the assessee is wholly unfounded and untenable. The obvious and incontrovertible factual position in the present case is only one contract between the assessee and its customers-express or impliedand the contract is the contract for supply of food and drinks. No part of it was relatable to anything else. Hence the whole of the consideration paid by the customers constituted sale price within the meaning of section 2(29) of the Act. 8.. In view of the above, we answer questions 2 and 4 in the negative and in favour of the revenue. 9.. This reference is disposed of accordingly. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs. Reference disposed of accordingly.
-
1995 (2) TMI 375 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ires otherwise. We do not propose to discuss in any detail this aspect of the matter as it is not necessary to do so in this case in view of our finding that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Sales Tax Officer should have made two assessments, one for the period of twelve months from July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 and another for a period of 9 months from July 1, 1988 to March 31, 1989, under sub-section (1) of section 33 and the proviso thereto respectively. 5.. In view of the above we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the assessee had adopted transitional accounting so as to be liable to single assessment under section 33A of the Act for the period of 21 months from July 1, 1987 to March 31, 1989. 6.. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 7.. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 374 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Levy of sales tax - sales turnover of goods sold by the assessee by public auction and the canteen sales made by it during the period April 1, 1984 to March 31, 1985 - Held that: - the Explanation to Section 2(11) of the said Act which had included “Railway Administration” in “dealer” has been held to be clarificatory and that Indian Railways represented by the Controller of Stores is a dealer.
-
1995 (2) TMI 373 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ITR 334 FB and that of the Supreme Court in State Bank of Travancore v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala 1986 158 ITR 102 is therefore wholly misplaced particularly when the facts of the said cases are distinguishable from the facts of the present cases noticed above. 23.. In the result these writ petitions fail and are hereby dismissed but in the circumstances without any orders as to costs. Interim orders passed shall stand vacated. Immediately after the judgment was announced, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for the continuance of the interim orders of stay for a further period of six weeks to enable them to prefer writ appeals before a Division Bench of this Court. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and with a view to give the petitioners a fair opportunity to agitate the matter in the appeal, I direct that the interim orders of stay granted in all these cases shall continue for a period of six weeks from today. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 372 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ot exigible under section 22(2) of the Act. In the decision reported in 1993 90 STC 243 (Steel Sales Organisation v. State of Tamil Nadu) cited supra, this Court came to the conclusion that there would not have been any bona fide contention on the part of the assessee in collecting the excessive tax and therefore, held that penalty is exigible under section 22(2) of the Act on the facts arising in that case. Considering the facts arising in this case in the assessment years under consideration, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was correct in deleting the penalty accepting the reasons given by the assessee that the excessive taxes were paid back to the customers wherever the customers were found and deposited the excessive tax wherever the customers were not found. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal in the assessment years under consideration. 4.. In the result, the revisions are dismissed. No costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 371 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... were packed. Gunny bags, obviously, were used only as a convenient and cheap means of transport, because without packing the bottles in some containers, it was difficult to carry them from one place to another. Gunny bags were naturally the obvious choice. In such circumstances, it is difficult to hold that the purchasers of empty bottles intended to purchase the gunny bags also. That being so, no implied sale of gunny bags can be inferred. 10. In view of the above discussion, we are of the clear opinion that the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of purchase tax on the assessee under section 13 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act on the ground that there was no sale of gunny bags express or implied along with the empty bottles sold by the assessee. 11.. Accordingly we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 370 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rpreted according to its popular sense, meaning that sense which people conversant with the subjectmatter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it . There is no doubt in this case that in common parlance surfane packing paper is known as packing paper or paper fit for packing. Furthermore, the language employed in entry 24(2) of Schedule C being very wide, viz., paper of all kinds , surfane packing paper, which is only a form of paper cannot be excluded merely by reference to the material from which it is manufactured. 10.. For the reasons set out above, we are of the clear opinion that the Tribunal was right in holding that surfane packing paper is a kind of paper falling under entry 24(2) of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The question referred to us is, therefore, answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. 11.. In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 369 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... gned assessment orders of MRF Tyres and CEAT Tyres for the aforesaid periods in the light of this judgment. Such modification should be made and revisional order dated December 20, 1991, of the West Bengal Commercial Taxes Tribunal in the case of Vikrant Tyres should be implemented within eight weeks from this date. If after such modification and implementation, it is found that any amount of tax has been paid by any of these companies in excess, such excess amount will be refunded to the respective companies within a period of eight weeks from the date of modification or implementation. 21.. Thus, all the three applications in RN-291 of 1992, RN-162 and RN-163 of 1994 are disposed of without any order for costs. On an oral submission made by Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned State Representative on behalf of Revenue, operation of this judgment is stayed for eight weeks. P.R. BALASUBRAMANIAN (Technical Member).-I agree. RN-162 and RN-163 of 1994 allowed and RN-291 of 1992 dismissed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 368 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... counter-affidavit. However, learned Government Advocate argued the matter contending that the assessing officer has jurisdiction to pass order under section 19 of the Act and if at all the petitioner has a remedy to file appeal as provided under the Finance Act. We have gone through the orders impugned and we are satisfied that the assessing officer, after giving notice on the basis of audit objection, without applying any more his independent mind to the objection raised has passed the assessment orders and on that ground the assessment orders are liable to be set aside and, accordingly, they are set aside. The assessing officer will give the petitioner reasonable opportunity of being heard and after hearing the petitioner shall decide the objection to jurisdiction to reopen the assessment and if he is satisfied that he has got jurisdiction then pass orders in accordance with law. This writ application is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 367 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... finished products under the Industrial Policy, it would not be liable to sales tax on sale of its finished products. The assessing officer will have to decide the question of exemption of the petitioner under the Assam Industrial Policy, 1991, while taking up the assessment. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the assessing officer, namely, the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit C, Guwahati, shall decide the question of exemption of the petitioner under the Assam Industrial Policy, 1991 and accordingly take up the assessment of the petitioner pursuant to his notice dated August 11, 1994. He shall also pass orders on the application of the petitioner for issue of declaration forms for purpose of purchase of goods free of tax. After such orders are passed, it shall be open for the petitioner to move the appropriate authority or this Court in case he is aggrieved. With this direction the writ petition is disposed of. Petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1995 (2) TMI 366 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... anner, assist us in the determination of the nature of the contract or affect the true nature thereof. The fact that provision has been made for payment of sales tax on the value of machinery cannot convert a works contract into transaction of sale. Moreover, the burden of showing that a works contract involved a taxable sale of materials used in execution of the work is upon the taxing authorities which cannot be discharged merely by showing that property in goods which belonged to the party executing the contract stood transferred to the other party. In the instant case, in our opinion, taxing authorities have failed to establish that the contract in question involved sale of machineries and equipments. 12. In view of the above discussion, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 365 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 15.. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we are of the clear opinion that in the instant case, the assessment made on the basis of returns furnished by the assessee, though belatedly, is an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 33 of the Act and not under sub-section (5) thereof. The Tribunal erred in law in treating the same to be an assessment under sub-section (5) of section 33 and on that basis holding Explanation (1) to section 36(2)(c) inapplicable and setting aside the penalty levied with the aid thereof. 16.. Accordingly we answer Question No. 1 and Question No. 2 in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. 17.. So far as the Question No. 3 is concerned, in view of our answer to Questions Nos. 1 and 2, it is now academic for the present purpose. We therefore decline to answer the same. 18.. This reference is disposed of accordingly. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Reference disposed of accordingly.
-
1995 (2) TMI 364 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y of tax on sales effected by him at Sangli in the State of Maharashtra in excess of the amount of tax payable by him under the provisions of the Act. This is evident from the chart given in para 13 above which shows that the amounts of tax collected and the amounts of tax assessed during the three periods were exactly the same. That being so, the provision for forfeiture contained in section 37(1) of the Act would not apply to the instant case. The order of forfeiture, therefore, would not be sustainable on this count too. 18.. Having regard to the foregoing discussion, we are of the clear opinion that in the instant case, the Tribunal was not justified in law in upholding the forfeiture of tax collected by the assessee. Accordingly, the question referred to us by the Tribunal is answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 19.. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1995 (2) TMI 363 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rectification. Reliance is also placed upon the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Vijaya Wines v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1978 42 STC 329 (332). Keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court in P.K. Syed Akbar Sahib s case 1988 70 STC 191 1988 173 ITR 1, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal should have taken note of the abovesaid judgment while deciding the application for rectification of the mistake. As the Supreme Court has already held that its subsequent judgment, if not taken note of, would be deemed to be a mistake apparent from the record, the Tribunal had no option but to pass orders afresh, by taking into account the latest law settled by the Supreme Court. Accordingly the case is remanded back to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal for passing appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of law and the directions of the Supreme Court, as noted hereinabove. Appropriate orders shall be passed after notice to the parties. Writ petition allowed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 362 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e is however, being placed on the fact that one Kailash Narayan had put his signatures on the order sheet. This does not amount to service of order. When a dispute is raised, proper opportunity should be given to the parties. Whether Kailash Narayan has any concern with the firm or not is not known. As such, the matter is remanded to the appellate authority to determine (i) as to whether copy of the order under section 39(3) was ever served on the assessee (ii) whether Kailash Narayan was a person who was duly authorised by the assessee to appear before the authorities (iii) after determining the aforementioned questions, the questions as to whether the appeal was within limitation or not be also decided. 8.. The appellate authority should take into consideration that the petitioner has challenged the powers to initiate suo motu proceedings. Tax in dispute has been deposited. 9.. Annexure P/4 is quashed. The appellate authority would decide the issue afresh. Matter remanded.
-
1995 (2) TMI 361 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... udgment correctly. The said judgment cannot be construed to be of universal application. In any event, it has now to be read in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Shiv Datt s case 1992 84 STC 497. 8.. Considering the nature of the process undertaken by the assessee on the polyester film in the instant case and the effect thereof on the nature, use, and description of the commodity in the trade, we are of the clear opinion that the lacquering of polyester films does not amount to manufacture within the meaning of section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. There is no essential difference in identity between polyester film and the lacquered polyester film. Polyester film remains polyester film despite application of the process of lacquering. 9.. The question referred to us is, therefore, answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 10.. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs. Reference answered in the negative.
............
|
