|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 491 Records
-
2002 (10) TMI 700 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Smuggling - Attempt to export illicitly - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... ort to Bangladesh. As such, by extending the benefit of doubt I set aside the personal penalty imposed upon them. 11. emsp As regards the personal penalty of Rs. 25,000.00 (Rupees twenty-five thousand) imposed upon M/s. Tripura Pharma Company, it is seen that the Proprietor of the said company in his very first statement that his company was approached for the purchase of the goods in question for which purposes, he had complied all the legal formalities. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I extend the benefit of doubt to the appellant M/s. Tripura Pharma Company and set aside the imposition of personal penalty imposed upon the said company. Inasmuch as absolute confiscation of the goods under seizure numbering 52,004 bottles in 1,060 cartons under Section 113(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, has not been challenged by anybody in the appeals, the same is upheld. All the four appeals are disposed of in the above manner. Stay petitions are also disposed of accordingly.
-
2002 (10) TMI 699 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Exemption to goods supplied during warranty period - Refund - Unjust enrichment ... ... ... ... ..... the warranty. As such, we are of the view that the appellants are entitled to relief under the notification in question. 6. emsp As regards the unjust enrichment aspects, the appellate authority has observed that the books of account have not been produced by the appellants to explain that the burden of incidence of duty has been borne by them and not passed on to any other person. The appellants have relied upon the Chartered Accountants rsquo Certificate and have also referred to the Tribunal rsquo s judgment as reported in 2002 (149) E.L.T. 772 (T) 2002 (50) RLT 973 and 2001 (47) RLT 713 (Che.). We set aside the impugned Order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for considering the unjust enrichment aspect afresh in the light of the Tribunal rsquo s judgment and in the light of any other evidence which the appellants would be in a position to produce before the original adjudicating authority. Appeal is allowed by way of remand in the above terms.
-
2002 (10) TMI 698 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Precedent - Binding effect of Tribunal’s decision on Commissioner ... ... ... ... ..... . emsp Accordingly, I set aside the Order-in-Original and allow the appeal. rdquo 2. emsp As is evident from the above para, Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the above appeal by following the earlier decisions of the Tribunal holding that Notfn. No. 14/96 is retrospective in nature. The Revenue in their grounds of appeal have contended that the Tribunal rsquo s views have not been accepted by Commissioner and a reference application has been filed in the Hon rsquo ble High Court of Chennai. However, no stay of the Tribunal rsquo s order has been granted by the Hon rsquo ble High Court. It is well settled law that mere filing of reference application by the Tribunal will not act as a stay by the Hon rsquo ble High Court and the Tribunal rsquo s decision would continue to hold the field. As such I am of the view that the appellate authority has rightly allowed the appeal of the respondents. There is no mertis in the Revenue rsquo s appeal and the same is accordingly rejected.
-
2002 (10) TMI 697 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat ... ... ... ... ..... ddition to the actual price of the goods. 3. emsp Ld. JDR has reiterated this ground today. 4. emsp Ld. Counsel for the respondents has justified the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the strength of the terms of the Board rsquo s Circular as also on those of the Notification ibid. 5. emsp I have examined the submissions. I have closely perused the Board rsquo s Circular and find that the Circular is very clear to the effect that sales tax, freight, etc., were includible in the value of the goods (inputs) to be reckoned for the purpose of computation of 12 under Notification No. 58/97-C.E. (N.T.). 6. emsp In the instant case, the respondents have taken deemed Modvat credit 12 of the value of the inputs including sales tax, freight, etc., in terms of the Board rsquo s Circular. There is nothing wrong with the impugned order. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly understood and applied the circular to the respondent rsquo s case. The appeals of the Revenue are rejected.
-
2002 (10) TMI 696 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding-up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... Quite obviously the Bank which had exclusively demarcated the security would be reluctant to share that security with any other party. Logically, therefore, the moment a financial institution approaches the winding-up Court, a legal presumption should be drawn that it is willing to place itself in the same position that all other secured creditors are in. While a financial institution may be willing to enjoy the luxury of more than one legal remedy, it would be imprudent for it to dilute its exclusive charge over a specific debt. The factual matrix in Viral Filaments Ltd. rsquo s case (supra), where no substantial defence was found to exist, distinguishes that case from the present. 16. For these manifold reasons I do not consider it appropriate to exercise the summary and equitable jurisdiction available under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act. The petition as well as all pending applications are accordingly dismissed. However, the parties shall bear their own costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 695 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding-up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound-up ... ... ... ... ..... mitted. The Respondent is directed to deposit an initial sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000 inasmuch as the Respondent has pleaded that it is a growing concern and earning profits. The deposit be made with the Registrar of this Court within six weeks. I am, however, of the view that the claim of interest at the rate of 36 per cent per annum is excessive and contrary to the Usurious Loans At. The Petitioner is directed to file a fresh Statement of Accounts showing the debts that are outstanding till date, computed on the basis of the Agreement between the parties, with interest computed at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. 13. In the event that the aforementioned sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000 is not deposited within the period of six weeks, it is likely that the citation shall be published on the next date of hearing. It may then become expedient and appropriate for the appointment of a Provisional Liquidator specifically to take possession of the helicopter, which is the equipment in question.
-
2002 (10) TMI 694 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
High Court - Appeal to ... ... ... ... ..... the rights of the parties would not be appealable under section 15T. 9. It was contended before us by the learned Counsel for the appellants that SEBI Board was not right in rejecting the request of the appellants to give inspection of the relevant documents. He in support of his contention cited various judgments. We do not propose to go into these questions because these questions can be appropriately considered by the Appellate Tribunal in appeal filed against the final order that may be passed by the SEBI Board. In case any adverse order is passed by the SEBI Board against the appellants the appellants will be entitled to agitate all issues in an appeal that may be filed against such order. 10. For the reasons stated above, we hold that the appeals are not maintainable and we dismiss the same with no order as to costs. 11. Appellants are granted four weeks time to file the reply. If reply is not filed within the said period. SEBI Board is at liberty to proceed ex parte.
-
2002 (10) TMI 693 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... respondent has accepted the liability to pay not only its own debt, but also the debt of its sister concern, viz., Skyline NEPC Limited. I hold that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for admission and hence, the petition filed by the petitioner is maintainable. I also hold that the requirements of notice under section 434 are complied with and the respondent has neglected to pay the debt, in spite of its own admission. Hence, the petition is liable to be admitted and accordingly, it is admitted. Since I find that there is no chance for any settlement between the parties, the petitioner is directed to advertise the petition for winding up in one issue of the English daily, The Hindu and in one issue of the Tamil daily, Dina Malar and also in one issue of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette giving 21 clear days notice for the date of hearing 9-12-2002. 42. It is made clear that the above view has been arrived at only for the purpose of admitting the company petition.
-
2002 (10) TMI 692 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Winding up of sick industrial company ... ... ... ... ..... visional Liquidator as per its order dated 13-12-2001 directing him to do such things in such manner to bring the properties of the company for sale at the earliest and any interference caused into these orders already made, since being susceptible to jeopardise the interest of the company and its secured creditors and all others interested therein and therefore, the interference sought to be made by granting leave to the applicant to sell the assets of the company and permitting the Committee constituted by the BIFR to do so in spite of the Official Liquidator as Provisional Liquidator proceeding with the sale of the assets in the manner required by law, is neither necessary nor warranted and it has to be decided that no such interference need be made into the present state of affairs and in result, both the above Company Applications should only fail and be dismissed. In result, both the above Company Applications are without merits and they are dismissed as such. No costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 691 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in account ... ... ... ... ..... notice. In fact cause of action for an offence under section 138 of the Act first arises on the date of drawal of the cheque. Various procedures and times prescribed in section 138 of the Act are all formalities to be observed before filing of a complaint. Question of issuance of notice under proviso (b) to section 138 of the Act arises only if the cheque issued is dishonoured. So issuance of a cheque is first stage of cause of action. By 23-7-1997 petitioner admittedly was a Director of A-1 company. So he cannot be heard to say that he is not liable for the offence under section 138 of the Act. All these apart, the question as to when the resignation was tendered and when it was accepted, and when the accepted resignation was intimated to the Registrar of Companies, are all matters of fact, which have to be gone into and decided at the time of trial and cannot be decided in a quash proceedings. Therefore, I find no merits in this petition and hence the petition is dismissed.
-
2002 (10) TMI 690 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Arbitrators - Appointment of ... ... ... ... ..... uary, 2002 declaring his intention to withdraw, as an arbitrator from the case. Though in the said letter, he stated that facts disclosed do not disqualify him to act as a sole arbitrator and without showing any disregard to the Hon rsquo ble Court appointing him as the sole arbitrator, he was stepping down to avoid multiplicity to the proceedings. Copy of the said letter was tendered by the learned counsel for the petitioner and is taken on record. It is commendable that the learned arbitrator has followed the best traditions of our legal system in which a person against whom an allegation of bias is made often withdraws himself as an arbitrator without inviting an adjudication on the allegation. This is on the principle that justice must not only be done but must be seen to have been done. I commend the decision of the arbitrator. 4. In view of the action of the learned arbitrator, the present Civil Revision Application has become infructuous and is allowed to be withdrawn.
-
2002 (10) TMI 689 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Tribunal - Application to ... ... ... ... ..... ees Fifty Lakhs only) to the respondent-bank, without prejudice to contentions to be raised at the time of hearing of application for setting aside ex parte decree. Such an amount of Rs. 50,00,000.00 will be paid by the petitioner to the respondent-bank on or before December 31, 2002. Till January 1, 2003, no further proceedings in pursuance of ex parte decree will be taken by the respondent-bank. But if the amount will not be paid by the petitioner latest by December 31, 2002 as stipulated hereinabove, it will be open to the respondent-bank to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. It is also clarified that if the amount will be deposited by the petitioner, it will be kept by the respondent-bank in a separate account, and it will accrue interest as per the practice of the bank. At the time of final hearing of the application, an appropriate order will be passed by the Tribunal. 12. Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Rule made absolute. No costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 688 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Tribunal - Application to ... ... ... ... ..... inarily, it would have been enough for this court to set aside the order of the Appellate Tribunal and allow the application for waiver. But in the present case the prayer for waiver is required to be granted by this court, being persuaded to hold that, the proceedings before the Tribunal for recording order dated 26-6-2002, was in breach of principles of natural justice. In such a situation it will be proper to relegate the parties to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the prayer for grant of interim relief, if any. 9. In the circumstances, orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal as well as the first Tribunal are set aside. It will be open to the respondent Bank to file a formal application asserting that the petitioners-defendants have admitted the claim in respect of the amount of debt due to the respondent Bank and, if such application is filed, the Tribunal may consider the same in accordance with law. 10. Rule made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 687 - HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Winding up - Disclaimer of onerous property ... ... ... ... ..... claimer, as prayed for is allowed, the same may cause serious hindrance in the winding up proceeding. Judged from the aforesaid stand point, the property in question cannot be said to have become onerous, unprofitable and burdensome to the Company in liquidation. The preservation of such properties in the hands of the Official Liquidator on the other hand is necessary to bring the winding up proceeding to a successful conclusion. The applicant, undoubtedly would be entitled to claim rent for the period of such possession of the leased property by the Official Liquidator till the liquidation proceedings come to an end, a claim which can always be raised before the Official Liquidator in the proceedings before the said authority. 11. For the reasons aforesaid, I am inclined to hold that for the present, the applicant is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for in the present application. The same, therefore, shall stand refused. The application is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 686 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Execution of deeds, Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... nce. When the respondent has established that there is a bona fide dispute as regards the debt, in my view, the winding up proceedings is not a proper remedy to resolve the dispute. It is a case where the respondent has put forward a defence and denied the claim on bona fide grounds and the respondent is able to point out that it has a valid defence in denying the claim of the petitioner. I therefore, hold that the defence of the respondent has been made in good faith. I hold that the petitioner has not established that there is a debt due and payable by the respondent-company. Though the petitioner has produced the agreement of guarantee as well as the agreement dated 1st April, 1997, when the respondent denies the execution and the validity of the documents on which reliance has been placed by the petitioner, I am of the view that the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is not to approach this court. In this view of the matter, the company petition is dismissed. No costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 685 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Winding-up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... e clause is invoked, that it is just and equitable not only to the persons applying for winding up but also to the company and to all its shareholders. Considering all the above aspects, I accept the objection raised by the respondent that the petitioners have effective alternative remedy under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, accordingly I hold that the present petition for winding up of the respondent-company is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. Though both parties have raised several contentions with supporting documents and judicial decisions to substantiate their respective claims, in view of my above conclusion, I am of the view that it is unnecessary to consider the same. 17. In the light of what is stated above, the company petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail of the alternative remedy provided under the Companies Act to ventilate their grievances. No costs. Consequently, Company Application No. 1306 of 2001 is closed.
-
2002 (10) TMI 684 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Charges – Registration of ... ... ... ... ..... spondent with the applicant is subsequent to the winding up proceedings, in view of the fact that it satisfies the statutory compliance with section 125(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, and of the fact that the contract being bona fide, fair, just and reasonable and in view of the power conferred on this court under sub-section (2) of section 536 of the Companies Act, 1956, it is clear that the charge created by the second respondent in favour of the applicant and registered with the Registrar of Companies on August 16, 2000, is valid and a exclusive charge in respect of immovable properties of the second respondent measuring to an extent of 42 acres and 50 cents located at Kilai and Ulandai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chengalpattu District and gets priority and prevails over the unregistered charge in favour of the third respondent. Company Application No. 403 of 2002 is ordered accordingly. In view of the said conclusion, Company Application No. 404 of 2002 is also ordered.
-
2002 (10) TMI 683 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding-up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound-up ... ... ... ... ..... 8. The decision in the case of Bombay Cotton Mfg. Co. (supra) relied on by Shri Sakseria has neither relevance nor application to the present case where the company has bona fide disputed the alleged debt on the solid foundations. Similarly, the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the case of M.V. Paulose (supra ) does not assist the petitioner as in that case debt was admitted but dispute was in respect of payment made to the company or to its director personally. The facts are different in our matter. Even the third judgment of the Delhi High Court (supra) will not help the learned Counsel as in that case the plea of limitation that the debt was time-barred was viewed as not bona fide. The debt was admitted by the company but it was pleaded that there was sufficient security therefor. In our case the debt is not admitted but is bona fide disputed. 9. In the aforesaid circumstances, there is no substance in the petition and hence it is dismissed with no orders as to costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 682 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Directors - Appointment of ... ... ... ... ..... the rights of the petitioners in terms of the subscription-cum-shareholders rsquo agreement are not abridged and are duly implemented. There is, therefore, no merit in this contention. 33. Before concluding, it is necessary to clarify that all the observations contained in this order are confined to the disposal of the application under section 9 and shall not be construed as amounting to the expression of any final opinion on the merits of the rights and contentions of the parties in the arbitral proceedings. 34. In the circumstances, the prayers for reliefs in terms of prayer, clauses (a), (b )(i) and (b)(ii ) are rejected. There shall be an order in terms of prayer clauses (b)(iii ) and (b)( iv). However, parties will comply with the directions issued hereinabove in regard to the holding of a fresh meeting of the Board of directors for the finalisation of the accounts, in terms of the statements recorded earlier. 35. The Arbitration petition is allowed in the above terms.
-
2002 (10) TMI 681 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Circumstances in which a company may be wound up, Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts
............
|
