|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 472 Records
-
1998 (9) TMI 510 - SUPREME COURT
Whether High Court correct in directing the appellants herein to issue necessary sales tax exemption certificate in favour of the respondents under the Industrial Policy Resolution, 1989 issued by the State of Orissa?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. Admittedly, respondent- unit was set up prior to December 1, 1989 when the IPR 1986 was operative, the respondent-unit therefore cannot be treated as new unit under IPR 1989 and notification dated August 16, 1990 granting sales tax exemption to oil mills having output of more than 10 m.t. was not applicable to the respondent-unit which is a unit under IPR of 1986. Since the respondent-unit was not eligible to get concession in the form of sales tax exemption under IPR 1986 it was not a continuing unit of 1986 policy under Part II of IPR 1989 and further was not a new industry under IPR 1989, as such was not entitled to sales tax exemption under notification dated August 16, 1990.
Thus the judgment and order of the High Court in allowing the writ application of the respondent is not sustainable in law
-
1998 (9) TMI 507 - SUPREME COURT
Whether appellant liable to pay tax on the sale of refined oil as they had already paid tax for purchase of the crude oil and, if so, what would be the rate thereof?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The quoted cases does not come in aid of the appellant: firstly, because it considered the definition of “manufacture” (which, of course, is identical with its definition under the Act) in the context of “resale” of goods as defined in that Act and secondly, because of the nature and extent of the process which the crude oil undergoes to radically change itself to marketable refined oil.
The other contention raised by Mr. Swarup was that they had purchased the crude oil after payment of tax and hence they cannot be made liable to pay tax again for its sale. This contention has to be stated only to be rejected for the Act expressly provides imposition of multistage taxation under clauses (ii) and (iii) of section 3(3)(b) of the Act.
-
1998 (9) TMI 489 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
SSI Exemption - Modvat on inputs ... ... ... ... ..... en withdrawn in respect of iron and steel from November, 1987. This position was accepted by the authorised Representative and Excise Incharge of the Company. 6. emsp The adjudicating authority had observed that when the inputs were not duty paid, the manufacturer was required either to avail of the benefit of full exemption or to pay full rate of duty. In the show cause notice, it has been alleged that the assessee has suppressed the facts with the intention to allow their sister concern to avail higher credit of duty in respect of final products of the appellants, which was further used as inputs by their sister concern. 7. emsp The assessee has not followed the proper procedure and we do not find any ground to interfere with the view taken by the Addl. Collector of Central Excise, Pune, who had adjudicated the matter. 8. emsp Taking all the relevant facts and considerations into account, we do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
1998 (9) TMI 488 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Redemption fine - Quantum of - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... tention of the goods and the demurrage which the importer will be required to pay rdquo . This reasoning for a lower redemption fine finds support in the Tribunal decision in Delhi Plastics (supra). Therefore it cannot be said, in our view, that the Commissioner rsquo s order fixing the redemption fine as above is an infirmity in that order. Therefore the department rsquo s appeal is rejected. 5. emsp As regards, the cross-objection by the Respondent, the fact that the goods have been imported against a licence transfer of which found to be irregular and the import against production of such licence for the clearance of goods has rightly held to be not authorised. Though the penalty has been imposed on the Respondents at Rs. 1 lakh this has to be seen in the context of the lenient view taken as regards the redemption fine. Therefore we feel there is no case made out for any modification in the quantum of penalty. The appeal and the cross-objection are accordingly disposed of.
-
1998 (9) TMI 483 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Winding up - Power of Court to stay or restrain proceedings against company ... ... ... ... ..... airs of the company, more particularly, when on their own plea, no relief is sought to stay such proceedings against directors and proceedings against them are otherwise likely to continue. 83. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to show how and in what manner the conduct of prosecution under section 138 before the respective courts is likely to affect adversely the undertaking or are likely to affect the winding up proceedings or conduct of affairs of the company in general as relief undertaking so as to warrant the discretion to be exercised in favour of the petitioner for staying the criminal proceedings which are required to be promptly decided to fulfil the purpose of statute and not to gather dust of time. 84. I, therefore, do not consider it appropriate to stay the criminal proceedings under section 138 pending before the various Courts referred to in the schedule annexed to the affidavit. 85. The application is, therefore, rejected. No order as to costs.
-
1998 (9) TMI 482 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... liability to pay stamp duty in accordance with law. 18. A certified copy of this order shall be delivered to the Registrar of Companies within 30 days from the date of this order by each of the two transferor companies and on such copy being so delivered, the transferor companies shall stand dissolved and the Registrar of Companies shall place all documents relating to the transferor companies and registered with him on the file kept by him in relation to the transferee company and the files relating to the said three companies shall be consolidated accordingly. 19. Liberty to apply to any person interested for directions in the matter, if necessary. 20. The fees of Mr. Jayant Patel, the learned standing counsel for the Central Government are quantified at Rs. 2,500 in each of these company petitions and the same shall be paid by the transferee company within two weeks from today. 21. These three petitions are accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms. SCL q JANUARY 20, 1999
-
1998 (9) TMI 481 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... d for in the petitions. Consequently, all the rights, liabilities and duties of the transferor companies shall stand transferred to and vested in the transferee company, namely, Hyderabad Securities Ltd, without any further act or deed and all the liabilities and duties of the transferor companies shall also become the liabilities and duties of the transferee company and the transferor companies shall stand dissolved, without winding up, in view of the scheme of amalgam-ation as per the aforementioned Annexures A to I, being sanctioned. 25. The petitioners are directed to file copy of this order with the Registrar of Companies within a period of 60 days and the Registrar of Companies shall treat the transferor companies as dissolved with effect from 1-4-1997. It is also clarified that any person interested shall be entitled to apply to this court for any appropriated direction that may be necessary. Costs as incurred. The petitions are thus disposed of. SCL q DECEMBER 6, 1999
-
1998 (9) TMI 478 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Share capital - Conversion of shares into stock ... ... ... ... ..... y the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder while dealing with the affairs of the company. The fact that enforcement of any of the provisions of the Act against the company will be harsh, is not a matter for consideration by this Court in the above petition filed by the petitioners under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the criminal proceedings launched against them for non-compliance of the provisions of the Act. Whether the petitioners are liable for the penalty as contemplated under section 97(3) or whether there are any extenuating or mitigating circumstances by which the petitioners can be absolved from the liability has to be considered by the Magistrate s Court. In view of what is stated above, absolutely no ground is made out by the petitioners to quash the criminal proceedings launched against the peti-tioners by invoking the provisions of section 482 and, hence, the Criminal Miscellaneous case is dismissed. SCL q JANUARY 5, 1999
-
1998 (9) TMI 477 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Winding up - Avoidance of transfer, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... e present case are concerned, the official liquidator who is contesting respondent in the facts of the case has already appeared before the court and, therefore, it would have been an empty formality only to admit the case, and then decide it finally. Whereas the contesting party has appeared, it cannot be said to be a case of dismissing the appeal without notice to the other side or in limine. Therefore, we did not consider it necessary to admit the appeal and then proceed for final hearing, and whereas after hearing both the sides, we are satisfied that there is no substance in the appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. 10. Civil Application No. 154 of 1998 is with regard to stay. In view of the order passed as above, dismissing the appeal, no orders are required to be passed in Civil Application No. 154 of 1998, and the same is accordingly disposed of. 11. Civil Application Nos. 157 of 1998 and 158 of 1998 also stand disposed of as mentioned in paragraph Nos. 1 and 2 above.
-
1998 (9) TMI 475 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Notice for meeting, Directors - Power of, Oppression and mismanagement –Power of Tribunal on application under sections 397 and 398
-
1998 (9) TMI 473 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding up – Commencement of ... ... ... ... ..... for the ten flat buyers states that the ten flat buyers are aged persons. Their amounts have been due since 1989. They have been litigating for their rightful due for the last so many years. The Court respondent on one pretext or the other has been delaying the payment. Now since part payment has been deposited by the respondent and the Registry has calculated the amounts payable to each of the ten flat buyers, there is no impediment for this court to order for disbursement of the same to these ten flat buyers. Directions are accordingly given to the Registry to disburse the amount. deposited by the respondent-company proportionate to the amount due to each of the flat buyers as worked out by the Registry. Directions are given to the Registry to issue cheques in the name of each of the ten flat buyers forthwith. Directions are also given to the respondent to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 19,76,821.22 within a period of two months. Matter be now listed on December 8, 1998.
-
1998 (9) TMI 472 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... opy shall be verified by a certificate of a responsible officer of the company stating that it is a true copy or by a certificate of a public officer given under and in accordance with the provisions of section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872(1 of 1872). Emphasis Supplied The copy of the instrument duly verified as per the statutory dictate, evidencing or creating the charge has the character of an instrument. 13. Mr. Chinoi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, fairly conceded before us that the certified copy of the original instrument is an instrument. In view of this and discussion hereinabove, we do not propose to deal with the submission that the copy of the instrument is not a document as envisaged by section 2(1) of the Act of 1958. The petitioners are, therefore, liable to pay duties as ordered by the Superintendent of Stamp, Maharashtra. 14. Petitions are, therefore, dismissed. Rule discharged in each petition. Petition dismissed. SCL q JUNES, 1999
-
1998 (9) TMI 470 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... ma facie sustainable defence or a bona fide dispute of its obligations to discharge the alleged debts or liabilities, the Court may not entertain proceedings for winding up much less order winding up. This case is distinguishable on facts because, as noted above, I have found prima facie that the defence of the respondent-company does not appear to be a bona fide or a probable defence. 17. The question whether the respondent-company has lost its substratum or it has become commercially insolvent is not a question to be decided at the time of admission of the petition, but it may be decided during enquiry. 18. On considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the cases, I am of the opinion that the petition deserves to be admitted. Therefore, the petition is admitted. It is directed that advertisement shall be made in the prescribed form and shall be published in one issue of Deccan Chronicle of Hyderabad Edition and on a issue of Telugu Daily, Eenadu, as per rules.
-
1998 (9) TMI 468 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... s as evident by Exhibit B dated 18-12-1995 to the affidavit in rejoinder filed today dated 3-9-1998. For a contract to come into existence there must be unequivocal acceptance. There is no such material on record. 3. The counsel for the company contends that he opposes the filing of the rejoinder. Rejoinder is merely an answer to the contention raised by the company. I have therefore, rejected the submission of the learned counsel and have taken the said affidavit in rejoinder on record. 4. In the light of that, the following order mdash Petition is admitted. Fixed for hearing on 4-12-1998. To be advertised in Free Press Journal, Janmabhoomi and Maharashtra Government Gazette. Petitioner to deposit Rs. 1,000 with the Prothonotary and Senior Master within four weeks from today. 5. The counsel for the Respondent/Company seeks stay of the order. There is no substance in any of the defences raised on behalf of the company. Hence application for stay rejected. SCL q MARCH 20, 1999
-
1998 (9) TMI 466 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... ona fide dispute is concerned, the reply does not disclose any bona fide dispute. I am, therefore, satisfied that the company is indebted to the petitioners for the amount of the dishonoured cheque. In the light of that the following order Petition is admitted and made returnable on January 22, 1999. To be advertised in Free Press Journal, Janmabhomi and Maharashtra Government Gazette. Petitioners to deposit Rs. 1,000 with the Prothonotary and Senior Master within four weeks. There is also a prayer for appointment of a liquidator. I, however, do not propose to deal with the same in this petition. Liberty to the petitioners to apply. Counsel for the respondent-company seeks stay of the order for a period of six weeks. Stay subject to the condition that the company files an undertaking that they will not move the BIFR under the Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985, within a course of the week. Petitioners not to take steps to advertise the petition on or before October 31, 1998.
-
1998 (9) TMI 463 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Appointment of arbitrator ... ... ... ... ..... f the learned counsel for the simple reason that the Apex Court was pleased to make the aforesaid observations in the peculiar circumstances of the case that there was extension of time for execution of the works till 1977. Such is not the case here. On the other hand, as noted above, regarding the claim for the year 1967, the Apex Court has held that the claim being made after more than three years was hopelessly barred by limitation. The aforesaid observation of the Apex Court is of no help to the applicant. 15. For the foregoing reasons, I hold that the application is barred by limitation under article 137 of the Limitation Act because the light to apply for appointment of arbitrator had accrued to the applicant on 22-8-1994, but the application under section 11 was filed on 20-1-1998, that is beyond three years. 16. In the result, the application is dismissed. However, in the circums- tances of the case, I leave the parties to bear their own costs. SCL q DECEMBER 20, 1999
-
1998 (9) TMI 461 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... because, as noted above, the petitioner-firm has proved the indebtedness of the respondent-company as also its failure and/or negligence to pay the debt in question. The question whether the respondent-company is unable to meet its current liabilities as also the contingent and prospective liabilities is a question to be decided after advertisement of the petition and during the enquiry. In the result, the petition is admitted. The admission of the petition be advertised in one issue of the English daily, Deccan Chronicle, and one issue of the Telugu daily, Andhra Jyothi, as per rules. After the above order is pronounced and signed the following ORDER Learned counsel for the respondent states that his client intends to prefer an appeal against the order of admission of the petition. Therefore, the impugned order be suspended for a period of two weeks. The operation of the impugned order is suspended for a period of two weeks. For further proceedings, call on October 16, 1998.
-
1998 (9) TMI 430 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Further issue of capital ... ... ... ... ..... ssociation of the appellant-company before applying the provisions of sections 81 and 81(1A). On this count only, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 10. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to CLB, Principal Bench, New Delhi, with a direction to decide afresh whether the provisions of sections 81 and 81A applies to the appellant-company, after considering its articles of association and on the strength of the authority of Needle Industries (India) Ltd. rsquo s case ( supra), particularly keeping in view the aforementioned passages of the Apex Court. As the matter is pending since the year 1992, the CLB, Principal Bench, New Delhi, is directed to dispose of the matter preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Parties to the present petition through their learned counsel are directed to appear before the CLB, Principal Bench, New Delhi, on 7-10-1998 for further proceedings. SCL q DECEMBER 5, 1998
-
1998 (9) TMI 428 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Prospectus - Fraudulently inducing persons to invest money ... ... ... ... ..... ng the amount, he had committed an illegality. If an order to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs was passed by the learned Single Judge, it needs no interference. 14. For the above reasons, we are of the view that no ground has been made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The appeal deserves to be dismissed and is according dismissed. Notice is discharged. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be order as to costs. 15. Mr. Jhaveri prayed that the time to deposit amount of Rs. 50 lakhs as directed by the learned Single Judge may be extended. In the facts and circumstances of the case, time to deposit the amount is extended for six weeks from today. It is, however, clarified that the appeal will be heard by the appellate authority on merit only after the payment of Rs. 50 lakhs is made. It is also ordered that if during the extended period the amount is not paid, the order passed by the learned Single Judge as well as by us will not operate.
-
1998 (9) TMI 427 - SUPREME COURT
Whether in the proceedings under section 155 of the Companies Act, the Court has exclusive jurisdiction in respect of all the matters raised therein or have only summary jurisdiction?
Held that:- Appeal partly allowed. As gone through the judgment of the High Court it has rightly held the law pertaining to the jurisdiction of 'Court' under section 155 and even referred to some of the documents of the appellant but concluded since they are disputed and said to be forged hence directed for seeking leave if advised for suit. We feel it would have been appropriate if the Court would have seen for itself whether these documents are disputed and any document is alleged to be forged whether it said to be so only to exclude the jurisdiction of the court or it is genuinely so. Similarly we feel appropriate while deciding this the court should take into consideration the submissions for the respondents, whether it would come within the scope of rectification or not in the light of what we have said above.
Since the High Court has not examined this case in the aforesaid light, we feel it appropriate to direct the High Court to decide this question in the light of what we have said afresh
............
|
