|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 281 to 300 of 333 Records
-
1999 (1) TMI 53 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Unexplained Money ... ... ... ... ..... r section 68 in the cases of Ruchika and Monica Oswal, the department weakened its case (as argued by Id. counsel) in respect of section 69A addition in the case of Shri Jawahar Lal Oswal, although we have recorded detailed and independent reasons for deleting it under the same section. The shifting stand and uncertainty in the mind of the revenue has jeopardised the additions both under section 69A and section 68 in the respective cases when they contend quite emphatically that addition under section 69A in the case of Shri Jawahar Lal Oswal be upheld under section 69 and in the cases of Monica and Ruchika they canvass conversion of section 68 addition into a 69A addition. In concluding, we uphold the relief given by the CIT(A) in the cases of Monica and Ruchika Oswal. 51. In the result, the appeal of the assessee i.e., Shri Jawahar Lal Oswal is allowed and the cross appeal of the revenue is dismissed along with the revenue s appeals in the cases of Monica and Ruchika Oswal.
-
1999 (1) TMI 52 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Unexplained Money ... ... ... ... ..... such profit. It is only after the business is established then the expenditure related to such business can be allowed. The case of the appellant fails on the first fact that the existence of business is neither admitted nor established. 12. Before parting, we would like to give a observation that confiscation does not means loss because confiscation means to put the confiscated material in the state custody which will become property of the state as and when the case is finally decided. The confiscated property remains under custody of the State and retains the ownership of the person from whom it is confiscated till the decision of the final authority on the issue is delivered under the Custom Act. Keeping in view the above discussions, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has rightly made an addition and the ratio of Piara Singh s case is not applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case. 13. In the result the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed.
-
1999 (1) TMI 51 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Business Transactions, Speculative Transactions ... ... ... ... ..... cal or possible. Oppose to potential, possible, virtual, theoretical, hypothetical or nominal. Something real, in opposition to constructive or speculative, something existing in act. It is used as a legal term in contradistinction to virtual or constructive as of possession or occupation. Actually is opposed to seemingly, pretendely or feignedly, as actually engaged in forming means really, truly in act. As to actual Bias, Damages, Fraud, Notice, Occupation, Ouster, Possession Residence, Seisin Total loss, The actual has to be in contradistinction to symbolic or constructive possession or occupation. 12. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the transaction entered by the appellant with both the share brokers is a speculative transaction and as such the loss entered / earned in such transaction will not be adjusted with the profits earned from another business. The appeal of the appellant is accordingly dismissed. 13. In the result the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.
-
1999 (1) TMI 50 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... decisions of various High Courts relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee have taken a view in favour of the assessee. No doubt, the Gauhati High Court has taken a contrary view, which is in favour of the Revenue. It is now well settled law that when two views are possible, the one in favour of the assessee should prevail. It is important to note that the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in General Marketing and Mfg. Co. Ltd. has observed that for all intents and purpose the person who is in possession of the property which is saved by s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is entitled to get the benefit of s. 32 of the IT Act. Furthermore, the decision of the Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Narendra Ceramics clearly supports the case of the present assessee. 16. In view of the above, we do not find any ground for interfering with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly we confirm the same. 17. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.
-
1999 (1) TMI 49 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... decisions of various High Courts relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee have taken a view in favour of the assessee. No doubt, the Gauhati High Court has taken a contrary view, which is in favour of the Revenue. It is now well settled law that when two views are possible, the one in favour of the assessee should prevail. It is important to note that the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in General Marketing and Mfg. Co. Ltd. has observed that for all intents and purpose the person who is in possession of the property which is saved by s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is entitled to get the benefit of s. 32 of the IT Act. Furthermore, the decision of the Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Narendra Ceramics clearly supports the case of the present assessee. 16. In view of the above, we do not find any ground for interfering with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly we confirm the same. 17. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.
-
1999 (1) TMI 48 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Baggage - Clearance by Superintendent - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... equired to examine a percentage of the baggage would have meaning if the respondent had proved by the acceptable evidence that the impugned baggage was beyond that percentage which he had checked on the first day. As no such evidence have been laid before the Government, the argument is lame and not tenable. The subsequent action of the respondent after failing in his supervisory duty on 26-4-1994, has rather given to understand that he was interested in the clearance of the air-conditioners as used personal effects. Otherwise, he would not have regularised the non-duty payment in such a manner, there being an attempt to smuggle out the air-conditioners. 15.In the light of the discussions and the position obtaining, Government would hold that the respondent was liable for penalty under Section 112(a) for the omission and commission on his part and the order of the appellate authority is not tenable. The Revision Application, therefore, succeeds. 16.It is ordered accordingly.
-
1999 (1) TMI 47 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... .The exemption on computer software being not available to the applicant, refund of duty collected on Item Nos. 1 and 6 (valued at Rs. 1,08,340/-) is not tenable. The plea of revaluation is also not tenable because co-relation of the goods with the documents produced is not possible and the goods having already been cleared are not available for verification. 8.As regards the redemption fine, it is observed that the softwares brought through baggage mode do not constitute bona fide baggage either quantity-wise or value-wise in terms of the existing import policy read with the Baggage Rules. Hence, it is incorrect to say that there is no import restriction for this item and there is no ITC violation. However, considering all the aspects of the case, it is felt that a redemption fine of Rs. 25,000/- would suffice. 9.The penalty is, however, not disturbed as the applicant is a carrier. With the above relief, the Revision Application is disposed of. 10.It is ordered accordingly.
-
1999 (1) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Customs House Agent's Licence - Suspension of ... ... ... ... ..... these circumstances, a just relief has to be moulded so that the petitioner is not kept or tenterhooks for ever and the public respondents also wake up into some action, if any action there is to be. 13.Thus, unless within seven days of issuance of authenticated copies of this dictated order an enquiry against the writ petitioner is put afoot under or in relation to Regulation 23 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation, 1984 as relating to the suspension Memorandum dated 10-8-1998, the order of suspension made thereby of the Customs House Agent s License No. J-18 of M/s. Jha Shipping Agency shall be quashed and rendered inoperative permanently and for ever. 14.In case such enquiry is commenced parties will be at liberty to take future steps in accordance with law, but if and only if the strict time schedule of seven days mentioned above is adhered to. All parties and all others concerned to act on a signed xerox copy of this dictated order on the usual undertakings.
-
1999 (1) TMI 45 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Low sulphur heavy stock/furnace oil - Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... 7 and CWJC No. 4901 of 1987. CWJC No. 4902 of 1987 is also allowed to the extent that the impugned order Annexure-4 dated 30-4-1987 1987 (30) E.L.T. 289 (Tribunal) is quashed and the petitioner is found entitled to the benefit of total exemption from payment of excise duty under the subject notification only in respect of so much of the L.S.H.S./F.O. as has been utilised for the purpose of manufacture of ammonia which is further processed culminating in the manufacture of fertilizer, and not sold in the open market as ammonia. CWJC No. 860 of 1991 is allowed to the extent that the respondents are directed to reconsider the impugned demands made in the light of this judgment and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court referred to in this decision. Before making a fresh demand, if any, the respondents shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to cost. P.K. Sarkar, J. . - 30. I agree.
-
1999 (1) TMI 44 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... 1997-98 is in the neighborhood of Rs. 272 crores and the brought-forward loss from the previous period was about Rs. 586 crores, making a total of about Rs. 858 crores. The details of expenditure for the aforesaid financial year 1997-98 show that the interest and financial expenses are in the neighborhood of Rs. 208 crores, which far exceeds the income, which is around Rs. 80 crores. That being the position, prima facie it can, certainly be observed that the financial condition of the ICCL is precarious. We, therefore, direct the Tribunal to entertain the appeal if filed by the petitioner within a month from today without insisting upon pre-deposit. However, the Captive Power Plant, which was seized on 9-2-1994, shall continue to be under attachment of the Customs Department till disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal. 12. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions and observations. There shall be no order as to costs. Assent per S.N. Phukan, C.J. . - I agree.
-
1999 (1) TMI 43 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... f complicated facts and recording of evidence and such investigation could not be done on writ proceedings ... Similar view has been taken in State of U.P. and Others v. Bridge and Roof Company (India) Limited (Judgment To-day 1996 (7) S.C. 395 . 13.In the light of what is stated above, I hold that the writ petitions involve considerable disputed questions of fact which can be determined only by detailed evidence let in by all the parites concerned and the same cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. Likewise, the claim for royAlty cannot be sorted out or settled in writ proceedings since the same also requires valid oral and documentary evidence. Further, the claim of the petitioner, namely, A. Grahadurai as Managing Trustee itself in dispute before the appropriate Civil Curt. Accordingly all the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. I make it clear that the dismissal of thE Writ petitions will not be a bar from agitating the claim before the appropriate forum/Civil Court.
-
1999 (1) TMI 42 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... manufacturers for which he may even file additional affidavit. At this stage, I am not deciding that issue. It is made clear that, where there are more than one manufacturer, then the instruction or circular be made applicable to all of them. If a particular product is manufactured by one person only then the Board can issue the direction for that assessee alone. If the petitioner is in a position to establish that similar product is manufactured by other manufacturers, then the instructions issued by the Board may not be relied upon and the assessing authority may determine the duty independent of the circular issued. Annexure-O is accordingly quashed. Matter is remitted to assessing authority for passing a fresh order in accordance with law. If there is any other objection petitioner would be free to raise them before the authority concerned. Department may now issue corrigendum to the notice if it is found necessary. Petition stand disposed of with the above observations.
-
1999 (1) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Appeal - Limitation - Condonation of delay ... ... ... ... ..... dent could have exercised his discretion in a lenient manner, especially, when a ruling of the Supreme Court is to the effect that the provisions of the Limitation Act has to be considered liberally in an even-handed manner to give benefits to the litigants. Too much of strictness is not necessary since justice will be the end. Considering all the matters, I am of the view that the petitioner may be given an opportunity by condoning the delay in filing the appeal by imposing some conditions. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings are set aside and the delay in filing the appeal before the first respondent is condoned and the writ petitions are allowed on condition the petitioner pays a sum of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) by way of cost in each writ petition to the counsel for the respondents herein within three weeks from today, failing which the order of the first respondent shall stand confirmed. Post the matters on 28-1-1999 for reporting the payment of the costs.
-
1999 (1) TMI 40 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Stay/Dispensation of pre deposit ... ... ... ... ..... ecting the prayer of the petitioner for relaxation of requirement of pre-deposit. As the matter is still to be examined and decided by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) on merits, we do not propose to discuss at length the merits of the case or make any observation regarding thereto. Suffice it to say that, in our opinion, there is a good prime facie case in favour of the petitioner. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that ends of justice in this case will be met if the impugned order is set aside and the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) is directed to admit the appeal on deposit of 50 of the disputed demand on account of duty, penalty, etc. within four weeks from today. On such deposit being made, the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) may admit the appeal and hear the same as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from today. 5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.
-
1999 (1) TMI 39 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Search and seizure ... ... ... ... ..... the facts. In the circumstances, we are not satisfied that it shall be proper to interfere in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 42.The fourth question is answered accordingly. 43.Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Counsel for the petitioner contended that there was an inaccuracy in the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents inasmuch as it has been averred in para 25 that the documents were got signed from Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, in token of their having perused the same. Learned Counsel for the respondents had pointed out that there has been a bona fide mistake. All the documents were not got signed. Otherwise, the matter is of no consequence. Therefore, it need not detain us any further. 44.In view of our above conclusions, we find no merit in any of the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed. However, in the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1999 (1) TMI 38 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... 1875, their Lordships of the Supreme Court said that the assessee should not be allowed to bye-pass the statutory remedies where the question of fact would have been properly agitated and asserted. 5.In the present case, petitioner has come to this Court at the stage when only show cause notices have been issued to it. Petitioner ought to have given reply to the show cause notices and in case the same is decided against the petitioner, it has a right to file appeal before the Commissioner, Central Excise. Since further proceedings were stayed at the time of motion hearing, petitioner may, if so advised, file reply, if any, to the show cause notices within two months from today and on receipt of the reply, the appropriate authority is directed to pass a speaking order. Till such time, order is passed by the appropriate authority, recovery, if any, shall remain stayed. 6.With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition as well civil miscellaneous application stand disposed of.
-
1999 (1) TMI 37 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Confiscation and penalty - Adjudication - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... However, we are of the view that those decisions relied on by the second respondent are rendered on entirely different set of facts. The Tribunal being the first Appellate Authority has also failed to consider the true effect and import of Exts. P1 and P4 to P7 in the right perspective. Thus, on a consideration of the totality of the facts and circumstances canvassed before us, we have no hesitation in holding that the finding recorded by the statutory authorities is based on no evidence and can be regarded as perverse. Therefore, the findings are liable to be interfered with notwithstanding the existence of alternate remedy by way of appeal as contended by the learned counsel for the Revenue. Accordingly, Exts. P8, P11 and P14 are hereby quashed and there will be a direction to the third respondent to return the 30 gold biscuits seized from the first petitioner forthwith. Original Petition is allowed as above. No costs. Order on CMP No. 38600/97 in O.P. 21479/97 Dismissed.
-
1999 (1) TMI 36 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Octroi - Valuation of assessment of ... ... ... ... ..... lue of the article by inclusion of notional Customs duty and in the absence of authority to recover, the fact that the Corporation subsequently refunds the excess duty is no answer. The Division Bench also observed that the difficulty of the Corporation in recovering additional octroi charges in respect of some of the importers is not a ground to assume powers to include the Customs duty not payable in the value of the article. In view of the law laid down by the Division Bench, the action of the Corporation in loading additional duty of customs/countervailing duty to the value of the goods cannot be sustained. Rule is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayers (a) and (b). No order as to costs. 7.It is clarified that this order is without prejudice to the Corporation s right to frame appropriate Scheme as stated in paragraph 5 of the decision of the Division Bench. This order to be complied with within six weeks after verification of calculations submitted by the Company.
-
1999 (1) TMI 35 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... e Tribunal. 3.In considering the petitioner s request for early disposal of the appeal after getting the expert opinion, I am of the view that the petitioner can be given an opportunity to have the appeal disposed of early especially when his contention is that if the redemption fine as well as penalty are paid and the goods are taken delivery, then the goods may not be availed for the expert opinion. In fact the petitioner has taken the ground before the appellate authority in Ground No. B. Hence I am of the view that the appeal can be disposed of early. 4.In order to have the benefit for the early disposal, it is necessary that the petitioner should be put on terms. Hence the petitioner is directed to deposit the fine of Rs. Two lakhs and the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- within four weeks from today. On such payment, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal of the petitioner (No. C/484/98) within three months thereafter. The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
-
1999 (1) TMI 34 - SUPREME COURT
Validity and application of the Scheme, as modified by introduction to Rule 57F [read as 57F(4A)] of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, under which credit which was lying unutilised on 16th March, 1995 with the manufacturers, stood lapsed in the manner set out therein
Held that:- If on the inputs the assessee had already paid the taxes on the basis that when the goods are utilised in the manufacture of further products as inputs thereto then the tax on these goods gets adjusted which are finished subsequently. Thus a right accrued to the assessee on the date when they paid the tax on the raw materials or the inputs and that right would continue until the facility available thereto gets worked out or until those goods existed. Therefore, it becomes clear that Section 37 of the Act does not enable the authorities concerned to make a rule which is impugned herein and, therefore, we may have no hesitation to hold that the rule cannot be applied to the goods manufactured prior to 16-3-1995 on which duty had been paid and credit facility thereto has been availed of for the purpose of manufacture of further goods.
Allow the petitions filed by the assessees and declare that the said rule cannot be applied except in the manner indicated by us .
....
|
