|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 67 Records
-
1972 (12) TMI 71 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ter-State trade or commerce. As it is the above amended section which has to govern, the petitioner s contention that the assessee is entitled to get a refund of the local tax paid as soon as the goods are sold inter-State is no longer tenable as the amended section specifically imposes a further condition which was not there before that the tax so levied under the Central Act should have already been paid before the right to get a refund accrues. The amended provision squarely meets the contention of the petitioner raised in these petitions. The effect of this amendment is to supersede the decisions referred to above. The learned counsel for the assessee also concedes that as per the amended provision in section 15(b) the assessee is not entitled to the refund of the local taxes paid in view of the fact that it has not paid the Central sales tax on its inter-State sales. The result is the writ petitions are dismissed, but in the circumstances, no costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1972 (12) TMI 70 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... as defined in item 19 of the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, or whether they ceased to be mere cotton fabrics as defined in that entry and fell under entry 3 of Schedule E to the Act. This decision is a clear authority for the proposition that entry 15 of Schedule A, which incorporates that entry 19 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, must be construed having regard to its own language and that it would neither be proper nor helpful to construe it in the light of the provisions of another Act. In our opinion, therefore, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that Hind rubber beltings and Cooper rubber beltings are not covered by entry 15 of Schedule A to the Act. Our answer to the first question referred to us is, therefore, in the negative. The second question has not been pressed and it is, therefore, not necessary to answer the same. The assessee will pay the costs of the reference to the Commissioner. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1972 (12) TMI 69 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ling price to the licensees the retail selling price for the licensees is also fixed by the State Government under the powers vested under the Mysore Excise Act. The retail selling price of arrack fixed during the excise years 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69 have not been varied consequent upon the enactment of the impugned Act. Having regard to the nature of the trade in arrack which is a State monopoly and the control the State exercises on its prices at all stages, it cannot be said that the very fact that a high rate of sales tax was imposed, such an impost has the effect of directly impeding the freedom of trade within the State. Consequently, the impugned Act, in our judgment, did not require the previous sanction of the President under the proviso to article 304 of the Constitution. All the contentions urged for the petitioners having failed, for the reasons stated above, these writ petitions are dismissed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. One set. petitions dismissed.
-
1972 (12) TMI 68 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he article is used as an ingredient in the preparation of food, but whether it is a part or principal article of food itself like fish, meat, etc. It is not used as a substantial article of food and, therefore, it cannot be stated that it satisfies the test of used for the table . Though much may, be said for both views on the question whether coconut is grown in kitchen garden, as we are satisfied that it cannot be treated as a food used for the table, we are not inclined to go into that question. For the foregoing reasons, we are also of the view that coconut is not vegetable within the meaning of the Government notification cited above. The result is, T.C. No. 195 of 1968 is allowed and T.C. No. 411 of 1969, W.P. Nos. 1439 and 3425 of 1970 are dismissed. State will be entitled to their costs in T.C. Nos. 195 of 1968 and 411 of 1969 and W.P. No. 1439 of 1970. Counsel fee Rs. 150 in each case. There will be no order as to costs in W.P. No. 3425 of 1970. Ordered accordingly.
-
1972 (12) TMI 67 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he actual production. As such the claim for inclusion of this item in the sales tax registration certificate cannot be supported. 6.. So far as items Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are concerned, the decision in J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer(1), makes it clear that building materials like lime and cement not required in the manufacture of goods for sale cannot be considered as raw materials in the manufacture or processing of goods. Weighing, measuring and packing equipments cannot also come within the scope of rule 13, since they are not intended for use in the manufacture of goods. Item No. 5, as noted by the Tribunal, is too vague and indefinite to deserve inclusion in the sales tax registration certificate. The view of the Tribunal that the above items are not eligible for inclusion in the sales tax registration certificate appears to be correct. The revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. But in the circumstances we make no order as to costs.
-
1972 (12) TMI 66 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... at site to any other party, the control of the Government over the assessee and its employees in the matter of manufacture of bricks and the non-liability of the Government for any compensation or damages for foreclosure of the contract before it was executed fully. The learned judges also held that even if the property in the goods passed to the Government on completion of the contract, by mere passing of the property, the contract would not be rendered into a contract for sale because the property passed not as a result of the contract of sale but as an incident of the contract of work and labour . This decision, which we respectfully follow, completely answers the contentions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader. We, accordingly, hold that the contract in the present case is a contract for work and labour and not a contract for sale of goods. The tax revision petitions are, therefore, allowed with costs-one set. Counsel s fee is fixed at Rs. 150. Petitions allowed.
-
1972 (12) TMI 65 - SUPREME COURT
Validity of section 3-AB of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 challenged - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. As this section as it now stands incorporates into itself the impugned notifications. Those notifications have now become part of that section. To find out the scope and effect of that section, we have not only to read the section but we have also to read the concerned notifications. If so read, as it should be, it is clear that the section not only levies tax on the bricks at the prescribed rates, it also provides for the quantification of tax. The law is given retrospective effect. The fact that in those notifications it is mentioned that they were issued in pursuance of the power conferred under section 3-A does not in any way take away the intended legal effect. The intention of the Legislature is clear.
-
1972 (12) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Manging agent, Remuneration to managing agent ... ... ... ... ..... mitted to the Textile Commissioner at Bombay. It is true that there is some variation between the stock declarations given to the bank and in the entries in the stock books maintained by the assessee. But that is explained by the assessee saying that the stock declarations given to the banks were only rough estimates and not accurate and that those entered in the account books and those shown in the returns submitted by the assessee to the Textile Commissioner alone are to be taken as the basis. In the circumstances of this case we do not see any error in the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal is justified in accepting the books as correct because the entries therein tallied with the returns submitted by the assessee to the Textile Commissioner and ignoring the stock declarations made by the assessee to the banks. The result is that the questions are answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee will have his costs. Counsel s tee, Rs. 250 (one set).
-
1972 (12) TMI 52 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... precedent to the institution of a proceeding, (2)that failure to obtain such leave before the institution of the proceeding did not entail dismissal of the proceeding, and (3)that the proceeding instituted without the leave of the court would, however, be ineffective until leave was obtained. Therefore, both on principle, and authority, I have no hesitation in holding that the order of the learned munsiff dismissing the application filed by the petitioner as not maintainable is clearly without jurisdiction. He should have directed the petitioner to obtain the leave of the winding-up court keeping the application pending. The civil revision petition is, therefore, allowed. The lower court is directed to restore the Interlocutory Application No. 1169/70 to its file and proceed with the application after the leave of the winding-up court is obtained by the petitioner under section 446 of the Act. Since no one appeared to oppose this petition, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1972 (12) TMI 38 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the process of manufacture had been completed before the mid-night of 28th February?
Held that:- There was a certificate given by an expert on behalf of the appellants and there were copies of two letters written by departmental chemists, which accidentally fell into the hands of the appellants, to the effect that before the mid-night of 28th February, 1961 these goods were in a chemically completely manufactured stage. The argument has throughout proceeded on the basis that it is not enough that the goods in question are chemically in a completely manufactured stage and that if there are physical changes brought about later it will still be a manufacture. It was even mentioned by the respondents that the dye- stuff in lumps were not subject to excise duty.
We consider it advisable that the matter should be remanded back to the Bombay High Court to enable both parties to produce evidence on the disputed questions.
-
1972 (12) TMI 37 - SUPREME COURT
Valuation - Wholesale market - Valuation - Favoured buyer - Valuation - Sole distributor - Valuation - Dealings at arms length - Nature of excise duty - Valuation - Exclusion of post manufacturing - Valuation - Freight, interest, octroi etc.
-
1972 (12) TMI 36 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Liquor Business, Partnership Whether Legal ... ... ... ... ..... court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pagoda Hotel and Restaurant, and we see no reason to depart from the view expressed by that Division Bench. As a result of the discussion aforesaid, we would answer the question referred to us as follows On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-firm constituted by the instrument of partnership, dated September 20, 1952, was not entitled to the grant of registration for the assessment year 1960-61 under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of the liquor business, although it might have been entitled to registration in respect of the business relating to medicines. We accordingly answer the reference as above. Let this reference be returned to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to take further steps in accordance with the answer given by us. However, under the circumstances, we direct that there shall be no order as to the costs of the proceedings in this court which shall be borne as incurred.
-
1972 (12) TMI 35 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
High Court, Reference Application ... ... ... ... ..... ceeding in a court of civil jurisdiction, cannot be subject to the provisions of Order 33, Civil Procedure Code ........ The learned judge applied the provisions of section 141 of the Civil Procedure Code to these proceedings. It will thus be seen that the Bombay and the Madras High Courts have made the provisions of Order 33, Civil Procedure Code, applicable to probate and administration proceedings under the Indian Succession Act, by virtue of section 141. In my opinion, by virtue of section 141 of the Civil Procedure Code, the provisions of Order 33 of the Civil Procedure Code are equally applicable to applications under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act and the present petition cannot be dismissed on the preliminary point that a pauper petition is not maintainable. The petition will now go back to the learned Prothonotary and Senior Master for investigation as to whether the petitioner is in fact a pauper. Costs of this reference shall be costs in the pauper petition.
-
1972 (12) TMI 34 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
High Court, Income Tax Act, Income Tax Authorities ... ... ... ... ..... rther deduction of profit of Rs. 83,169. No question regarding this was even agitated either before the Income-tax Officer or before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or even before the Tribunal. It was not the subject-matter of the appeal and the Tribunal, consequently, had no jurisdiction to award any relief not claimed by the assessee in that regard. We agree with the Tribunal s view that the matter before the Tribunal related only to the addition of a sum of Rs. 99,984 made by the Income-tax Officer which was completely deducted on evaluation of the stock. It was not competent to go further into the matter and give a greater relief than what was asked for by the assessee in its appeal. We would, accordingly, answer the first question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and against the department. We answer the second question as above in favour of the department and against the assessee. We leave the parties to bear their own costs. Advocat s fee Rs. 250.
-
1972 (12) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
These are two writ petitions for the issue of writs of prohibition prohibiting the respondent, Income-tax Officer, from continuing the proceedings in pursuance of his notice issued under section 148 - Originally the Hundi transactions were accepted by the ITO whether some evidence to show that the assessee could have indulged in bogus transactions would be sufficient to reopen the assessment - writ petitions are liable to be dismissed and they are accordingly dismissed
-
1972 (12) TMI 32 - KERALA HIGH COURT
The jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Quilon, to issue notices under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the petitioner, for the assessment years 1961-62 to 1963-64 is challenged in these proceedings.
-
1972 (12) TMI 31 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Scope of investigation by a Tax Recovery Officer - petitioner in each of these writ petitions is aggrieved by the summary disposal given by the respondent as the Tax Recovery Officer functioning under the provisions of the Income-tax Act - word "investigation" in r. 11(1) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 read in conjunction with the powers conferred upon the Tax Recovery Officer which reflect the powers of an ordinary Civil Court implies that there must be a full, fair and adequate enquiry - In a case like this, where rights of parties are to be adjudicated by a quasi-judicial tribunal, a cursory or perfunctory order of the nature scrutinised by me ought not to have been passed. In this view, I am of the opinion that there has not been a full adjudication as required under law by the respondent and, therefore, there is an error apparent in the orders passed by the respondent.
-
1972 (12) TMI 30 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Estate Duty Act, 1953 - One N. M. Khajamian Rowther died on November 9, 1954. Prior to his death he executed on May 29, 1945, a wakfnama in respect of certain properties. The four sons and four daughters of the wakif were nominated as mutawallis of the trust properties and the properties themselves were transferred in the name of Khajamian Wakf Estate. The wakfnama provided for the utilisation of the income of the trust properties for payment of certain expenses - " Whether Tribunal was right in law in holding that the properties comprised in the Khajaminan Wakf cannot be included in the dutiable estate under section 12 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ? "
-
1972 (12) TMI 29 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Taxation Laws (Continuation and Validation of Recovery Proceedings) Act, 1964 - tax ultimately payable less than the tax paid before the order levying penalty was passed - whether refund of penalty can be allowed Here section 3(1)(c) specifically validates the penalty orders notwithstanding that the amount of tax for non-payment of which penalty has been levied has been reduced in the final order. When the statute has specifically validated the penalty levied earlier it is not open to the petitioner to invoke equitable considerations and question the validity of the orders of penalty. In our view the respondent was justified in holding that the petitioner is not entitled to the refund of the entirety of Rs. 11,000 levied as penalty
-
1972 (12) TMI 28 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
When all primary facts were placed before Income-tax Officer at original assessment, whether subsequent change of opinion by the Income-tax Officer permits action under section 34(1)(a) - whether Income-tax Officer getting subsequent information is relevant for action under section 34(1)(a) "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could validly raise an objection to the issue of notice under section 34(1)(a) ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether the facts and the circumstances of the case justified the issue of notice under section 34(1)(a) ?" - Q. (1): Not pressed on behalf of the revenue. Therefore, answered in the affirmative. Q. (2): In the negative.
|
