|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 587 Records
-
2004 (4) TMI 544 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ingle Judge of the Jharkhand High Court struck down the said condition on the ground that there was no provision under the Jharkhand Sales Tax Act to obtain registration, even though not covered by the charging section. However, the learned single Judge held that the State without amending law and without prescribing guideline or making rules under the Bihar Finance Act or Jharkhand Sales Tax Act, incorporated the aforesaid condition. 27.. In the State of Bihar, as stated above, already a policy decision has been taken with a view to achieve the object of policy. The said condition in the tender notice has been incorporated, which, as stated above, does not suffer from any of the infirmities as urged on behalf of the petitioner. The said decisions were tendered in different context and hence not relevant in the present context. 28.. For the reasons aforementioned, we do not find any merit in this writ application and it is, accordingly, dismissed. Writ application dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 543 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... article does not correspond to the specific entry See Commissioner of Sales Tax v. C.A. Glass Works 1995 99 STC 308 (All.) . A word which is not defined in the enactment has to be understood in its popular and commercial sense with reference to the context in which it occurred. Reference can be made to a judgment of the Supreme Court given in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kores (India) Ltd. 1977 39 STC 8 AIR 1977 SC 132. Keeping in view of the above principles relating to interpretation of entries in the notification of sales tax and statute, it is clear that in common parlance, dalia is treated as broken foodgrain and is not different commercial commodity. Dalia can be used for the same purpose as wheat. By grinding dalia flour ata can be manufactured out of it. 7.. In the result there is no error of law in the order of the Tribunal. The view taken by the Tribunal is wholly justified. There is no merit in the revision. The revision is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 542 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... th in such a broad manner. We are aware that in appropriate case, the High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution, can interfere with the order even though alternate remedy was not availed. However, we find in the present case that the petitioner has not specifically challenged the order passed by the assessing authority and the prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of the appellate authority and to direct such appellate authority to entertain the appeal and dispose of the same on merit. In the absence of any specific challenge with regard to order of assessment, we do not consider the question as to whether the order passed by the assessing authority is to be quashed by exercise of jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution. 7.. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.P.M.P. No. 14663 of 2002 is closed. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 541 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... customers and wherever the evidence was not produced the refund amount has been forfeited. In these circumstances, the amount forfeited by the Government cannot be claimed from the applicant. The grievance of the applicant that once the tax collected has been returned to the customers at the instance of the State, the said amount cannot be recovered from the applicant subsequently seems to be justified. However, in a reference application, the exercise of the powers of this Court is restricted to answering the question raised in the application. Therefore, no directions can be given in that behalf. However, if the applicant makes an application for waiver of tax and interest, within 2 weeks from today, then the respondents may consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. 33. All the three reference applications are disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. Parties may be provided with the authenticated copy. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
2004 (4) TMI 540 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eferred supra will be operative only if there is no contract to the contrary between the parties. Even as per the agreement, exact transport charges are not paid by the assessee. The table already furnished would only indicate that the assessee fixed some freight charges on slab basis and he gave that rebate to the purchaser. Thus, the buyer pays the catalogue price less transport rebate allowed, irrespective of the amount paid for freight charges by the assessee. Fluctuation in freight charges is not the concern of the buyer as he is bound to pay only the catalogue price or f.o.r. price. Thus, the agreed price being inclusive of freight subject to fixed transport rebate allowed, it would be a matter of indifference to the customer as to what is the amount of freight. 14.. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the view that there are no substance in the writ petitions and the same are dismissed. No costs. Connected W.M.Ps. are also dismissed. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 539 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ty as property of every description except immovable property. Trademark right is intangible goods, which can be subject-matter of transfer. As already pointed out, M/s. Muthu Agencies was granted permission to use the trademark without any restriction whatsoever for a particular period. Consequently, it can only be taken as transfer of a right to use and not a mere right to enjoy. Simply because the assessee retained the right for himself to use the trademark and reserved the right to grant permission to others to use the trademark, it would not take away the character of the transaction as one of transfer of a right to use. That being so, this Court has to only hold that the order of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai, confirming the order of the Joint Commissioner-III (SMR), Chepauk, is well in order. 9. In this view of the matter, there are no merits in this writ petition and the same is dismissed. Connected W.P. M.Ps. stand closed. Writ petition dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 538 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d several punishments even where the offences have been defined to exclude mens rea. In the case of Director of Enforcement v. Municipal Corporation Limited (1996) 1 JT 79 (SC) after quoting the following passage from Corpus Juris Secundum, Vol. 85, at page 580 expressed its agreement with the view expressed therein The penalty imposed for a tax delinquency is the civil obligation, remedial and coercive in its nature and it is far different from the penalty for crime or fine or forfeiture provided as punishment for violation of criminal or penal laws. 16.. Lastly it was submitted that in any view of the matter penalty should be imposed to the amount equivalent to the tax. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case I think interest of justice would be served if quantum of penalty is reduced to the amount of tax. The consequential amount of penalty is reduced to Rs. 24,200 17.. In the result the revision is allowed in part, as indicated above. Petition allowed in part.
-
2004 (4) TMI 537 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to different sizes as per requirements of the customers. Cutting of glass is not manufacturing of glass. Recently the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Mahalaxmi Stores 2003 129 STC 79 (2003) 1 SCC 70 has come to the conclusion that that the definition of manufacture as given under section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act (which is similar to U.P. Sales Tax Act) is very wide. But every type of variation of goods or finishing of goods would not amount to manufacture, unless it results in emergence of a new commercial commodity. In this case the Supreme Court has approved its earlier judgment given by it with respect to U.P. Sales Tax Act in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Lal Kunwa Stone Crusher (P.) Ltd. 2000 118 STC 287 (SC) (2000) 3 SCC 525 with reference to crushing of boulders resulting in different sizes ordinarily known as gitti. 7.. In view of the above I do not find any merit in the revision. The revision is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 536 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ger Bench is not upset by any subsequent decisions of the larger Benches, we declare the view taken by the two member bench in Satyanarayanas case (2002) 34 APSTJ 153, is not a good law. Since we have declared the law laid down by the two member Bench in the decision Satyanarayana Raw and Boiled Rice Mill v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2002) 34 APSTJ 153 is not a good law, the circular instructions issued by the Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department based on Satyanarayanas case (2002) 34 APSTJ 153, which has led to either revising the assessments made earlier and assessments made thereafter, cannot be held to be valid assessments and as such, we set aside the assessments or reassessments made. 7. The writ petitions are allowed. The respondents shall take consequential steps. No costs. That rule nisi has been made absolute as above. Witness the honourable Sri Devinder Gupta, the Chief Justice on this Thursday the First Day of April Two Thousand and Four. Writ petition allowed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 535 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... pinion that transaction of sales of old used buses or parts attracted the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act as it stood then. The mere fact that an Explanation was added subsequently would not dilute the aforesaid conclusion, as in our opinion, inclusion of the Explanation, so far as it relate to Transport Corporation , must be taken to be clarificatory in nature. The decision reported in 1999 114 STC 520 (SC) (State of Tamil Nadu v. Board of Trustees of the Port of Madras) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 12.. Once the aforesaid conclusion is reached, there is no scope for interfering with the order passed by the Tribunal. The contention to the effect that transactions were second sales cannot be accepted and the conclusion of the Tribunal on this aspect does not suffer from any irregularity. 13.. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in the writ petitions, which are accordingly dismissed. No costs. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 534 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Whether appellants are entitled to take credit on the value of the total quantity of molasses received in its factory for the purpose of manufacture ethyl alcohol without taking into consideration the certain percentage of loss which happens to be storage loss?
-
2004 (4) TMI 533 - SUPREME COURT
Whether Section 42 of the NDPS Act applies to the facts of this case?
Held that:- In the instant case there is no dispute that the tanker was moving on the public highway when it was stopped and searched. Section 43 therefore clearly applied to the facts of this case. Such being the factual position there was no requirement of the officer conducting the search to record the grounds of his belief as contemplated by the proviso to Section 42. Moreover it cannot be lost sight of that the Superintendent of Police was also a member of the searching party.
We, therefore, hold that in the facts of this case Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not applicable since the contraband was recovered on search of a vehicle and there was no personal search involved. The requirement of the proviso to Section 42 was also not required to be complied with since the recovery was made at a public place and was, therefore, governed by Section 43 of the Act which did not lay down any such requirement. Additionally, since the Superintendent of Police was a member of the search party and was exercising his authority under Section 41 of the NDPS Act, the proviso to Section 42 were not attracted. Appeal is allowed, the judgment and order of the High Court is set aside and the respondents are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each under Section 15 of the NDPS Act and to pay a fine of ₹ 1,00,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. The respondents shall be taken into custody to serve out the sentence subject to the provisions of Section 428 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
-
2004 (4) TMI 532 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the evidence is reliable or not and to what extent, such lapse affected the object of finding out the truth?
Held that:- There is no scope for reappraisal of evidence and interference with the concurrent findings of fact. This Court is not ordinarily to go into the credibility of the findings and interference is permissible only when exceptional and special circumstances exist which resulted in injustice to the accused. This is not a case of that nature and the evidence seems to be not only creditworthy but the conclusions arrived at also are well merited and sufficiently supported by overwhelming material on record. We, therefore, find no merit in this appeal, which is dismissed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 531 - SUPREME COURT
Extent of jurisdiction of election tribunal to direct recounting of votes - Held that:- It is expected that the statutory remedies provided for shall be availed of. If such an opportunity is availed of by the Election Petitioner; he has to state the reasons therefor. If no sufficient explanation is furnished by the Election Petitioner as to why such statutory remedy was not availed of, the Election Tribunal may consider the same as one of the factors for accepting or rejecting the prayer for recounting. An order of the prescribed authority passed in such application would render great assistance to the Election Tribunal in arriving at a decision as to whether a prima facie case for issuance of direction for recounting has been made out. Thus we are of the opinion that the judgment of the High Court does not call for any interference. The appeal as also the contempt petition are accordingly dismissed
-
2004 (4) TMI 530 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the High Court’s conclusion that the Civil Court at Barnala had jurisdiction to try the suit filed by respondent No.1-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ’Plaintiff No.1’) and Malwa Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ’plaintiff No.2’) is correct or not?
Held that:- The inevitable conclusion is that the High Curt was not justified in upsetting the order of First Appellate Court. It is not a case where the chosen Court did not have jurisdiction.
The intention of the parties can be culled out from use of the expressions "only", "alone", "exclusive" and the like with reference to a particular Court. But the intention to exclude a Court’s jurisdiction should be reflected in clear, unambiguous, explicit and specific terms. In such case only the accepted notions of contract would bind the parties. The first Appellate Court was justified in holding that it is only the Court at Udaipur which had jurisdiction to try the suit. The High Court did not keep the relevant aspects in view while reversing the judgment of the trial Court. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment of the High Court and restore that of the first Appellate Court. The Court at Barnala shall return the plaint to the plaintiff No.1 (respondent No.1) with appropriate endorsement under its seal which shall present it within a period of four weeks from the date of such endorsement of return before the proper Court at Udaipur. If it is so done, the question of limitation shall not be raised and the suit shall be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed.
-
2004 (4) TMI 529 - SUPREME COURT
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, it can be inferred that the jurisdiction of all other Courts except Courts in Mumbai is excluded?
Held that:- Having regard to the fact that the order was placed by the defendant at Bombay, the said order was accepted by the branch office of the plaintiff at Bombay, the advance payment was made by the defendant at Bombay, and as per the plaintiffs’ case the final payment was to be made at Bombay, there was a clear intention to confine the jurisdiction of the Courts in Bombay to the exclusion of all other Courts. The Court of Additional District Judge, Delhi had, therefore, no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed. The order dated 28.3.1997 of the Additional District Judge, Delhi as affirmed by the order dated 21.12.2001 by the Delhi High Court is set aside. The plaint filed by the respondent herein is ordered to be returned for presentation before the competent Court at Bombay.
-
2004 (4) TMI 528 - SUPREME COURT
Application of Clause (2) of Article 254 of the Constitution of India questioned - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. If the Central Act and the State Act had been enacted in terms of different entries of List I and List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. In this case, admittedly both the Central Act and the State Act had been enacted in terms of Entry 22 of List III of the Seventh Schedule of Constitution of India. In case of any conflict therefor the constitutional scheme contained in Article 254 will have to be applied. Even if Section 25S of the State Act is read to have an overriding effect, undoubtedly the provisions of the supreme lax shall prevail over a statute. A non-obstante clause contained in a statute cannot override the provisions of the Constitution of India.
-
2004 (4) TMI 527 - SUPREME COURT
Whether a parties' claim had to be acceded to now after a lapse of six years raised a point of proprietary and also loss of Rs. 40.70 lakhs to NTC?
Whether sale contracts were made in the manner indicated and were acted upon by the mills concerned was a question of fact which had to be established by evidence?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. We are also in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge that the writ petition which was filed in December 1989 was highly belated as the claim of the writ petitioners had been categorically refuted by the letter dated 7.11.1990 by the Director Finance on behalf of National Textile Corporation (South Maharashtra). The petition was therefore liable to be rejected on this ground alone. That apart, the prayer made in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the appellant herein to supply the goods (cloth). It is well settled that in order that a mandamus be issued to compel the authorities to do something, it must be shown that there is a statute which imposes a legal duty and the aggrieved party has a legal right under the Statute to enforce its performance. The present is a case of pure and simple business contract. The writ petitioners have no statutory right nor any statutory duty is cast upon the appellants whose performance may be legally enforced. No writ of mandamus can, therefore, be issued as prayed by the writ petitioners.
-
2004 (4) TMI 526 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ower consumption ratio in respect of M/s. Hans Castings to the Appellant rsquo s unit more so when there was no other evidence of any unaccounted production or unaccounted sale. The judgment of Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court in the case of Triveni Rubbers and Plastics (supra) cited by the learned DR would have been applicable to this case only if there had been some evidence of unaccounted production or unaccounted removal of the finished goods and in that case, the electricity consumption would have been an important evidence and could have been used for estimating the production. But only on the basis of electricity consumption ratio, which is also not abnormally high as compared to the ratio adopted by the Department, it cannot be presumed that there was unaccounted production and unaccounted clearance of the finished goods. In view of this, I hold that the impugned order is not sustainable. The same is set aside and the appeals are allowed. (Order dictated in the open Court)
-
2004 (4) TMI 525 - SUPREME COURT
Whether in counting "the whole number of members of the municipal board" in terms of rule 3(9) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Motion of No-Confidence against Chairman/Vice-Chairman) Rules 1974, nominated members have to be taken into consideration?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. As under pre 1994 and post 1994 provisions, the legislature intended that chairman/vice chairman shall be removed on passing of no-confidence motion by requisite majority of members having right to vote.
............
|
