|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 85 Records
-
1975 (1) TMI 81 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he Sales Tax Act and the Incometax Act has advisory capacity and it cannot determine questions of fact. It has been observed in Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal v. State of Bihar(1), that the duty of the High Court is to start with the statement of the case as the final statement of the facts and to answer the question with reference to that statement. In the present case, as already observed above, no finding has been given on the aforesaid question. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the statement of the case as given by the Tribunal is not sufficient to determine the question referred to this court. In view of the aforesaid facts, I refer the case back to the Tribunal directing it to give a finding whether the petitioner had complied with the notice under section 11(2) of the Act issued by the Assessing Authority or not. It should also mention therein as to which accounts and documents were required to be produced by the petitioner. GUJRAL, J.-I agree. Case remanded.
-
1975 (1) TMI 80 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sultant mixture is what is commercially known as French Coffee . The Tribunal has also found that it is in its characteristic different from pure coffee powder. The Tribunal has also found that coffee powder when mixed with chicory might change in colour and odour. The Tribunal has further held that what is produced is a new mixture in which some of the original components, namely, coffee powder and chicory powder, might have been merged. Applying the test we have laid down above to the facts so found by the Tribunal, there can be no doubt that the mixing and blending of coffee powder with chicory powder so as to bring into being a different commercial product known as French Coffee is a process which amounts to manufacture within the meaning of clause (17) of section 2 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. We accordingly answer the question reframed by us in the negative. The respondents will pay to the applicant the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 79 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t by putting these three articles in one carton and calling it auto feeder the respondents were adapting the articles originally purchased by them. It is not possible to accept this submission. Adaption means modification or alteration. None of the three articles purchased by the respondents, namely, glass bottles, rubber nipples and plastic caps, are in any manner modified or altered. It is quite incorrect to refer to these three articles as ingredients , as the Commissioner of Sales Tax has done. They are not the ingredients of a finished product or of a new product. They are three different articles put in one carton and sold under a different label, and selling articles under a different label or trade name cannot amount to manufacture within the meaning of clause (17) of the said section 2. We, accordingly, answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative. The applicant will pay to the respondents the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 78 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... inition of the term manufacture contained in section 2(17) of the said Act, it is yet necessary for any activity to amount to manufacture that a new or different commercial commodity or article must come into existence as a result thereof. In the present case, as clearly found by the Tribunal, what the respondent purchased was old or second-hand furniture and even after this furniture was polished or coloured, it still remained old or second-hand furniture and, therefore, no new or different commercial commodity or article came into being. This activity of the respondent cannot, therefore, be said to amount to manufacture and, in our view, the respondent cannot be regarded as a manufacturer for the purposes of the said Act. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in the conclusion to which it arrived. In the result, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative. The applicant to pay to the respondent the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e applicant, Mr. Cooper s submission was that as the designs were prepared not by the respondents themselves, who are merely a juristic person being a limited company, but an artist employed by them, the transactions were sales. In our opinion, this fact makes no difference. When a contract of work and labour or skill and labour is entered into, the person with whom it is entered into may either execute it himself wholly or may employ others to execute it. He may execute it in part and get the remaining part executed by his employees. It may be that the work is of such a nature that it is not possible for one man to execute every single part of it himself. Even great artists have employed pupils, apprentices and others to execute some parts of their paintings and murals, which are today world famous. In the result, we answer the question put to us in the affirmative. The applicant will pay to the respondents the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 76 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ulptor to make his statue or bust or a commercial artist to prepare a particular design, the essence of the contract is not the material out of which such painting, sculpture, bust or design is made, irrespective of the fact whether such material is paint, stone, marble or bronze, but the fruits of the artistic skill and ability of the artist concerned. It is not given to everyone to paint a picture or to make a statue or to draw a design or at least a painting, sculpture or design which others would be willing to commission and pay for. A similar question had also arisen before the Madras High Court in D.P. Roy Chowdhury v. State of Madras 1962 13 S.T.C. 866., where it was held that in making two bronze casts to order, a sculptor was not selling the goods but was executing a contract of skill and labour. In the result, we answer both the questions in the affirmative. The applicant will pay to the respondent the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 75 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ding that the preparation and supply of the design constituted a sale. The Tribunal held that this was not a transaction of sale. This reference was thereafter made at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax and the question which has been referred to us is Whether, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the impugned transaction in respect of the preparation and supply of the design by the respondent to his customers was not a sale within the meaning of section 2(28) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959? The question which arises in this reference is concluded by our judgment delivered today in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Studio Ratan Batra Private Ltd. 1975 35 S.T.C. 522. (Sales Tax Reference No. 10 of 1972). Following the said decision we answer the question in the affirmative. The applicant will pay to the respondent the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 74 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... urtherance of the aforesaid object of the assessee. The findings, therefore, indicate that the intention in carrying out the activity in question in that case was the making of the profits and the argument urged was that as these profits were intended to be utilised towards the ultimate charitable or religious object of the assessee-society, the assessee should not be considered to be a dealer. It must be noticed that, in that case, the books were purchased and sold by the assessee like any commercial book-seller and it was not the case of the assessee that these purchases and sales were made in the course of the direct implementation of the object of the assessee-society, as in the case before us. This case, therefore, is altogether different from the case before us. In the result, the question referred to us for our consideration must be answered in the affirmative. The applicant must pay to the respondent the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 73 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... subsidiary to the main object of supplying the crane, because it was undertaken in order to fulfil the contract of supplying the cranes in good working condition. The fact that the contracts provided for payment of sales tax coupled with the fact that the assessee charged and the purchasers paid sales tax corroborates the inference that the intention of the parties was to buy and sell cranes for a price and not to enter into a works contract. The contract was one and indivisible. It was either a contract of work or a contract of sale. It was not splittable into two contracts one for work and the other for sale. Since we have found that the contract was for sale, the entire price would constitute the turnover liable to tax. Our answer to the two questions referred to us is that the turnovers in question amounted to contract of sale of goods in their entirety. The Commissioner, Sales Tax, will be entitled to costs, which are assessed at Rs. 200. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1975 (1) TMI 72 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s belonging to another. For instance, a man may carry out the ornamenting, finishing or processing of his own goods or of goods belonging to the other. It is not necessary that the processor must process his own goods. We are, therefore, unable to accept this submission. For the above reasons, we hold that the processing of their customer s films by the applicants with the chemicals and materials purchased by the applicants constituted manufacture as defined by clause (17) of the said section 2 and the applicants were, therefore, manufacturers for the purposes of the said Act. For the reasons set out above, we answer the four questions reframed by us as follows Question No. (1) in the negative. Question No. (2) does not arise. Questions Nos. (3) and (4) in the affirmative. Since the applicants have succeeded in a part of this reference, while they have failed with respect to the other part, there will be no order as to costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1975 (1) TMI 71 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... at the amount of cartage or freight should be separately charged by the respondent-firm to the Housing Commissioner, the respondent-firm was not entitled to split up the all-inclusive rate of Rs. 48 per 1,000 bricks into two items, one for the price of the goods and the other for the cost of cartage and, therefore, the sale price payable to the respondent-firm was Rs. 48 per 1,000 bricks and not Rs. 33.60 per 1,000 bricks. Though the question arose in two assessment periods, the particular Sales Tax Reference which we have decided relates only to the period 1st April, 1959, to 31st December, 1959, and we answer the question submitted to us in the negative and hold that the respondent-firm was not entitled to a deduction of the cartage and transport charges shown and recovered by it separately in its invoices from the turnover of sales determined for the said period. The respondent-firm will pay to the applicant the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 70 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... under the said contract was the price of the tiles sold and delivered by the applicants to their customer because under the said terms 25 per cent of the amount was to be paid as advance while placing the order with the applicants and 60 per cent against delivery, the remaining 15 per cent being split up by the said terms into 10 per cent against setting and 5 per cent during polishing. Since the sale part of the said contract was worked out when the goods were delivered to the applicants customer at Bombay either at the railway station or the port and at the time of delivery 60 per cent was to be paid in addition to the 25 per cent paid as advance, it would be consistent and logical to take the aggregate percentage of 85 per cent as the price of tiles sold by the applicants to their customer. In the result, we answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative. The applicants will pay to the respondent the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 69 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y tax should be transferred or otherwise disposed of in whole or in part or there should be a change in the ownership of the said business, in consequence of which the dealer is succeeded in the business or any part thereof by any other person. The business of the firm of Copper Rollers Corporation was transferred and the change in its ownership took place only upon the execution of the said indenture of assignment. The fact that the said indenture of assignment specified an earlier date as the date on which the assignee took over some movables or the assets and liabilities is, in our opinion, irrelevant because but for this indenture of assignment there would have been no such taking over or assignment of the business at all either from the date of the indenture of assignment or from any other date. In the result, we answer the question submitted to us in the negative. The respondent will pay to the applicants the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 68 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Limitation Act for condonation of the delay in filing of the reference application under section 24(1) of the Act. 6.. Mr. Mohanti rightly had not challenged the exercise of discretion by the Additional Tribunal In the matter of condonation of delay and we have, therefore, not examined that aspect. 7.. The learned standing counsel had raised a point before us that there was Indeed no delay because the period of limitation prescribed under section 24(1) of the Act was to run from the date of service of the appellate order of the Tribunal on the Sales Tax Officer of the circle concerned as envisaged in rule 82 of the Rules and not from the date of service of the order on the Commissioner as contemplated under rule 73 thereof. In view of our conclusion on the question raised by the petitioner it is unnecessary to enter into an examination of that aspect. 8.. In the result, the writ application fails and is dismissed, but without costs. PANDA, J.-I agree. Application dismissed.
-
1975 (1) TMI 67 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rld it may wellnigh be impossible to carry on business without account books or without stationery, but it is not the account books or stationery which constitutes the business of a manufacturing company or a bank or an insurance company. These goods are adjuncts to the carrying on of the actual business activity of such company. In the case before us, the respondents purchased building materials which they admittedly used in carrying on of their business activity of building construction and building repairs. Without the building materials, their business would not have existed. These building materials were not adjuncts to the carrying on of their business of building contractors and, therefore, in purchasing these building materials the respondents were carrying on the business of buying these goods. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to us in the negative. The respondents will pay to the applicant the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 66 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 1962 13 S.T.C. 419. A revisional application to the Madras High Court was dismissed in limine. In appeal by special leave to It, the Supreme Court held that in view of the express statutory provisions of sections 10 and 40 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and of rule 26 of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules, 1959, the decision of the Madras High Court in S. Rathinawamy Chettiar v. State of Madras(1) required reconsideration. They accordingly allowed the appeal and remanded the case to the Tribunal for hearing the appeal afresh and determining it in accordance with law. For the reasons aforesaid we answer the question submitted to us In the negative and hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was not correct in law in holding that the levy of purchase tax under section 14 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, on pro rata basis was not justified. There will be no order as to costs of this reference. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 65 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... xemption under rule 3(28) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules in respect of its sale proceeds of bed-sheets, bed-spreads, towels, napkins, which were stitched in the mill premises. I accordingly make this rule absolute. Let a writ of certiorari be issued quashing the impugned assessment order dated 8th June, 1968 (annexure D to the petition), and the appellate order dated 19th March, 1968 (annexure E to the petition). Let a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to forbear from making any assessment for sales tax in respect of the petitioner s sale of bed-sheets, bed-spreads, cotton towels and cotton napkins in respect of the four quarters ending on 30th June, 1963. The respondents would be, however, at liberty to make fresh assessment in respect of the said four quarters in accordance with law in respect of sale of goods which were subject to sales tax. There will be no order as to costs. The operation of this order be stayed for 6 (six) weeks. Ordered accordingly.
-
1975 (1) TMI 64 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ted for in the contract was really a production of a work of art which really involved the skill of an artist. Under the circumstances, although construction of a document would be a question of law, and it would be so in this case also, we are satisfied that, on a construction of the contract, the reasons for holding that the contract was for a work of art are so overwhelming that no useful purpose would be served in directing a reference to be made. So far as the contracts in question before us are concerned, we really fail to see how any argument can arise about their severability. In the said contracts the parties have clearly stipulated separately for the production cost, for the language versions and for the supply of prints. We accordingly hold that the Tribunal was correct in the view which it took and answer the question as reframed by us in the affirmative. The applicant will pay to the respondents the costs of this reference. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1975 (1) TMI 63 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ract was in all material particulars similar to the one before us. In view of that decision, there is no doubt that the Tribunal has come to a correct conclusion, viz., that the contract in question was for the skill and labour of the respondent and not for sale of goods. Moreover, as pointed out by the Tribunal, it is not altogether irrelevant that out of the total amount paid as consideration to the respondent under the said contract, the amount paid towards the materials used by the respondent in the production of the said film came to only 6.5 per cent. In the result, we answer the question as follows On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the terms of the contract in question, the production and supply of the said documentary film by the respondent to the Government of India does not amount to a sale within the meaning of the said term in the said Act. The applicant must pay to the respondent the costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1975 (1) TMI 62 - SUPREME COURT
Whether clause (i) of section 2(1A) is violative of article 14?
Whether there is any discrimination in relation to the assessments for the period prior to April 1, 1970 between pending cases and the cases in which assessment had already been completed?
Whether the Corporation in determining the rates of conservancy tax has to find out the total expense it would have to incur for the various purposes mentioned in section 129(b) in connection with the conservancy service and 'thereafter to raise that amount by fixing different rates of conservancy tax for various categories of properties?
Whether the Corporation would have to find out separately the expense required in respect of conservancy service for each category of property and thereafter to fix such rate of conservancy tax for a category of property as would be sufficient to meet the expense on the conservancy service for that particular category?
Held that:- The petitioner-company is in occupation of the underground strata of the land through which their electric supply lines had been laid. In order to hold that space from the Corporation, it was essential, according to the learned counsel that there should have been some agreement between the petitioner company and the Corporation or that the Corporation should have given its consent for that purpose. We are unable to accede to the above submission. Clause (a) of section 139(1) of the Corporations Act fastens the liability for payment of property tax on the actual occupier of the premises held immediately from the Government or from the Corporation. In order to attract the liability under the above clause, it is not essential that there should have been an agreement between the actual occupier and the Government or the Corporation for the holding of the premises or that the holding must be with the consent of the Government or the Corporation. The liability would accrue even if the premises vesting in the Government or the Corporation are occupied in pursuance of a statutory provision. The words "held immediately from the Government or from the Corporation signify only the party in whom the premises vest which are held by the actual occupier thereof. Contention has also been advanced by Mr. Tarkunde regarding the quantum of tax levied on and the extent of the land alleged to have been occupied by the petitioner-company for the underground supply lines. This is essentially a question of fact and would have to be agitated before the authorities concerned, including the appellate authority. As a result of the above, we dismiss writ petitions.
|
