|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 928 Records
-
2013 (2) TMI 817 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... heet and considered to be an investment. The dividend earned was ₹ 8.36 lacs on the investment of ₹ 2.77 crores also establishes that the intention of the respondent was to earn dividend income. Moreover, as observed by the CIT(A) the respondent-assessee was a busy Doctor and would not have time to deal in share transaction on day to day basis. Thus, the Tribunal on the above facts concluded that income earned on sale of shares held for less than six months are to be taxed under the head Capital Gain. Moreover, we are informed that even for the earlier assessment years gain on sale of shares has been taxed by the revenue as short term capital gain and not as business income. 4) In view of the fact that the decision of the Tribunal taxing the gain made on sale of shares under the capital gain is based on a concurrent finding of fact, no question of law arises. Thus, we do not entertain this appeal. 5) Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
2013 (2) TMI 816 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the injury to be grievous but on the contrary, he has mentioned that there is no fracture and only a muscle injury. The weapon used fits in to the description as provided under Section 324 of IPC. The occurrence has taken place almost 20 years back. The parties are neighbours and there is nothing on record to show that the appellant had any criminal antecedents. Regard being had to the totality of the facts and circumstances, we think it appropriate that in the obtaining factual score, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 324 of IPC would be adequate. That apart, we are inclined to direct that the appellants shall pay a sum of ₹ 20,000/- towards compensation as envisaged under Section 357 (3) of the Code to the victim. The said amount shall be deposited before the learned trial Judge who shall disburse the same in favour of the victim on proper identification. 25. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence, the appeal stands disposed of.
-
2013 (2) TMI 815 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... wers of the Transferor companies shall be transferred to and vest in the Transferee company without any further act or deed. Similarly, in terms of the Scheme, all the liabilities and duties of the Transferor companies shall be transferred to the Transferee company without any further act or deed. Upon the Scheme coming into effect, the Transferor companies shall stand dissolved without winding up. It is, however, clarified that this order will not be construed as an order granting exemption from payment of stamp duty or taxes or any other charges, if payable in accordance with any law; or permission/ compliance with any other requirement which may be specifically required under any Law. 20. Learned counsel for the Petitioners states that the Petitioner companies would voluntarily deposit a sum of ₹ 1,00,000 in the Common Pool Fund of the OL within three weeks from today. The statement is taken on record. 21. The petition is allowed in the above terms. 22. Order dasti.
-
2013 (2) TMI 814 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... by the Division Bench for police intervention for verification of the students’ strength in all the aided schools. 18. We are, however, inclined to give a direction to the Education Department, State of Kerala to forthwith give effect to a circular dated 12.10.2011 to issue UID Card to all the school children and follow the guidelines and directions contained in their circular. Needless to say, the Government can always adopt, in future, better scientific methods to curb such types of bogus admissions in various aided schools. 19. We, however, find no reason to interfere with the direction given by the DPI to take further action to fix the liabilities for the irregularity committed in the school for the years 2008-09 and 2009-10, for which the appeal is pending before the State Government. The State Government will consider the appeal and take appropriate decision in accordance with law, if it is still pending. Appeal is allowed as above without any order as to costs.
-
2013 (2) TMI 813 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s was with the revenue at all times from the date of seizure in July, 2006. In this view of the matter, the distinction sought to be made by Mr. Chhotaray between request being made in a letter for adjustment of the seized amounts from that of a request being made in a statement made under Sections 132(4) of the Act is not a distincion which would warrant non application of the decision of this Court in the matter of Jyotiendra B.Modi (supra). In these circumstances, the amount of ₹ 41 lakhs seized during the course of the search be adjusted / considered while computing the interest leviable under Sections 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. 6. Accordingly, in our view the question as framed stands itxal-1646-12covered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the decision of this Court in the matter of Jyotindra B. Mody (supra). Thus, we see no reason to entertain the proposed question of law. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
2013 (2) TMI 812 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction - certification of correctness of inventory - conduct of proceedings under Section 110(1B) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Binding precedent or not - whether the functions must be performed by an Executive Magistrate or by a Judicial Magistrate?
Held that:- Since the task of certifying the correctness of the inventory in respect of seized goods under Section 110 (1B) of the Act is only an Executive function, in view of the provision of Section 3, sub-Section (4) of the Cr.P.C. the functions must be performed by an Executive Magistrate and not by a Judicial Magistrate.
Since the aspect of function of the Magistrate as appearing under Section 110 (1B) under reference to the provision of Section 3 (4) Cr.P.C. was not examined in the orders relied upon by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, they cannot be said to be binding precedents. Rather, the same are per incuriam.
The Petition is dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Collector concerned of the area to perform the functions as laid down under Section 110 (1B) of the Act.
-
2013 (2) TMI 811 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ssessment has been completed after taking into account the explanations and the evidences what-so-ever filed by the appellant and which have been duly considered by the A.O., the appellant could not have any grievance as far as just mentioning by the A.O. that the assessment has been completed u/s 144 of the Act is concerned. Even otherwise, the evidence or the explanation further sought to be considered by the Ld. Counsel have been duly considered before the A.O. and during the appellate proceedings. Therefore, these grounds of appeal are in a way infructuous and these need not be discussed in detail.” 23. In view of the above fact-situation and findings of ld. CIT(Appeals), the ground of appeal, raised by the assessee is dismissed. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA 944/Chd/2009 is dismissed. 25. Resultantly, all the three appeals (ITA No. 944, 945 & 946/Chd/2009) of the assessees are dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 19th Feb., 2013.
-
2013 (2) TMI 810 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... like to make any conclusive observations. However, we find a strong prima facie case in favour of the appellant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, when it is prima facie shown that the entire additional tax is raised on the ground of non-availability of credit pertaining to the purchases made from dealers whose registrations were cancelled subsequent to the purchases but with back date, in our opinion, the question of applicability of the ratio of decision of this Court in case of Meet Traders-Prop Kishor Babulal Shah Huf Vs. State of Gujarat and anr (supra) would certainly arise. 6. In that view of the matter, order dated 10.05.2012 passed by the Tribunal is set aside. Appellant shall enjoy stay against the recovery pending appeal before the Tribunal without any pre-deposit. The appeal shall be heard on merits and may be disposed of expeditiously. With above directions, tax appeal is disposed of. Civil Application does not survive and stands disposed of.
-
2013 (2) TMI 809 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tantial question of law. “Whether the Tribunal ought to have held that the benefit received by the Appellant on account of the policy on wind power generation was capital in nature and, therefore, not liable to tax ?”
-
2013 (2) TMI 808 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ld proceed ex parte. 18. It is pertinent to note that the initial relief claimed in this petition was virtually the same as was claimed by the petitioners in the earlier writ petition referred to above i.e. for quashing of the show cause notice and one of the contentions was reply to the notice cannot be furnished for want of material stored in the floppies which argument was turned down by this court by referring to the show cause notice itself. 19. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the petitioners are not entitle to any relief in this petition which in effect is a second petition virtually for the same cause of action. 20. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with direction to the respondents to pass appropriate final orders in accordance with law pursuant to the show cause notice dated 5-5-1999 positively within a period of three months from today and to report it compliance as soon as the order is so passed.
-
2013 (2) TMI 807 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Business Support Service - services relating to registration of the car - Held that: - The appellant is rendering assistance to their client in getting the motor vehicle registration done. The said activity, by no stretch of imagination, can be considered as supporting the business of their customers - the activity undertaken by the appellant does not come within the purview of ‘Business Support Service’.
The issue should have been examined on merits by the lower appellate authority, which he has not done - appeal allowed by way of remand.
-
2013 (2) TMI 806 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... rvices as they have not handled any cargo. They have only allowed other importers to store their goods importer by them in their warehouse for which they have charged storage charges. Accordingly, the Service Tax along with interest and imposition of penalties consequently are not sustainable in law. 4. Learned Dy. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the adjudicating and appellate authorities. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. 5.1 The activity undertaken by the appellant is storage of goods imported by other importers and the said activity would come under the purview of ‘Storage and Warehousing Services’ and not under the category of ‘Cargo Handling Services’ as decided by the department. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders as unsustainable in law. 6. Thus, the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any. (Dictated and pronounced in Court)
-
2013 (2) TMI 805 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... (AR) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 5.1 In view of the fact that the statutory provision relating to maintenance or repairs was amended only w.e.f. 1-6-2007 which included ‘computer software’ under the category of the goods, therefore, the Service Tax liability on maintenance or repair of software would be effective only from that date. It is a well settled position in law that ‘Explanations’ are prospective in nature, if they impose a burden on the assessee and will have retrospective effect if it is beneficial to the assessee. 5.2 In view of the above, the appellant had made out a strong case in their favour for grant of stay. Accordingly, we grant unconditional waiver from pre-deposit of the dues adjudged against the appellant and stay recovery thereof during pendency of the appeal. (Dictated and pronounced in Court)
-
2013 (2) TMI 804 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ice tax as also the eligibility to exemption under notification. Even if the appellant has not claimed the benefit before the adjudicating authority, the appellant cannot be debarred from raising this point of law in the appellate proceedings and therefore, it was incumbent upon the lower appellate authority to consider the plea taken by the appellant and come to a finding thereon as to the admissibility or otherwise of the claim made by the appellant. Inasmuch as the lower appellate authority has not done this, the matter has to go back before him for de novo consideration. Therefore, the lower appellate authority is directed to consider the plea raised by the appellant with regard to the leviability of the service tax and the eligibility to exemption Notification No. 8/2005-S.T., dated 1-3-2005 and thereafter pass a speaking order after hearing the appellant. 7. Thus, the appeal is allowed by way of remand. The stay application is also disposed of. (Dictated in Court)
-
2013 (2) TMI 803 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... held that the Tribunal ought not to have remanded the matter back as the claim was totally barred by limitation. 8. It further, however, held that the show cause notice was not based on Alert Circular and while setting aside the order of the Tribunal, considering the peculiar facts arising therein, the Bench clarified that in those cases where the larger period of limitation, as prescribed under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, had not been invoked, matters can be proceeded in terms of the order of the Tribunal which remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. 9. In the instant case, it can be noticed from the order impugned that the adjudicating authority has remanded the matter for fresh decision on giving reasonable opportunity to both the sides. The case is not based on the Alert Circular nor is the question arising so as to decide the issue of extended period of limitation. Resultantly, this appeal merits no consideration and the same is dismissed.
-
2013 (2) TMI 802 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Service of notice - Held that: - in spite of the best efforts, the respondent could not be served. The respondent is not available at the address mentioned in the writ petition and in the contempt petition filed by the respondent - The appellants will take appropriate action for service to the respondent - appeal disposed off.
-
2013 (2) TMI 801 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ingle Judge in CWJC No.12738 of 2011. 3. Although learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that this matter is not with respect to non-compliance of the order rather it is with respect to wrong compliance of the order and hence respondents must make it clear as to whether they want to comply the said order properly as the earlier order dated 01.10.2012 claimed by them to be compliance of the order of this Court was not legal, proper and justified and was not brought before the Division Bench. 4. In view of the interim order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, there is no occasion for this Court to take such step as prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner in that regard. He is at liberty to raise such points before the Division Bench. 5. In the said circumstances, let this MJC petition be listed under the same heading retaining its position after disposal of the above-mentioned LPA or vacation of the said order passed in the LPA, whichever is earlier.
-
2013 (2) TMI 800 - ITAT PUNE
Disallowance of deduction under section 80IB(10) - Held that:- Assessing Officer was not justified in observing that the assessee is not eligible for deduction since commencement certificate and completion certificate are not in the name of the assessee.
Construction of even one building with several residential units of the size not exceeding 1000 square feet ('E' building in the present case) would constitute a 'housing project' under Section 80IB(10) of the Act.
Gram panchayat Keshav Nagar, Mundhwa, Pune, is local authority for the purpose of issuing completion certificate for claiming deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of profit from sale of eligible flats in project in question. Assessee fulfilled all conditions laid down for claim of deduction u/s.80IB(10)
-
2013 (2) TMI 799 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... 11. Accordingly adjourned to 27-10-2011. Thereafter although the matter is coming up from 13-12-2011, the appellant has not caused presence to inform status of the matter before aforesaid Courts. 2. It appears that appellant is taking undue advantage of stay order passed on 13-5-2009 and not causing appearance to inform status of the matters before Apex Court and before High Court. Such an abuse of process of law is only to avail interim relief without co-operating for final disposal of appeal. This has caused prejudice to the interest of Revenue. Therefore, to protect interest of Revenue, it would be proper to vacate the stay order passed on 31-5-2009 which is already more than 3 years old, so that Revenue can recover its entire due in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 3. Notice is hereby issued to the appellant to show cause on 11-4-2013 as to the reason why its appeal shall not be dismissed for the abuse of process of law. (Pronounced in the open Court)
-
2013 (2) TMI 798 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e time of search, no lady member had stated her ornaments to be lying at the business premises and that the assessee has not produced any evidence in support of such contention either before the CIT(A) or before the ITAT?” (iii) “Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, Hon'ble ITAT has erred in directing to give benefit of telescoping even in respect of recurring deposit accounts and thus restoring the issue in respect of addition made of ₹ 2,39,028/- made on a/c of bank deposits to the file of A.O.? Having heard learned counsel for the Revenue, we notice that out of three questions, the Tribunal has remanded two issues back for afresh consideration. As can be noted, the Tribunal granted second inning to the assessee particularly first issue, which involves large revenue implication. The Tribunal gave proper reasons for remanding the matter and that therefore, in our opinion, no question of law arises. Tax Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
............
|
