|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 112 Records
-
1970 (4) TMI 129 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the respondents were entitled to claim the concessional rate under section 3(3) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. If the component is capable of identification by a chemical or other test as a component of a finished product falling within the Schedule, it would be an identifiable constituent within the meaning of section 3(3), Explanation, and the sale of the component would qualify for the concessional rate of tax. The High Court was, in our judgment, right in holding that the respondents were liable to tax only under section 3(3) and not under section 3(1) of the Act.
-
1970 (4) TMI 128 - SUPREME COURT
The turnover arising out of transactions aggregating to Rs. 21,47,228 is liable to sales tax in so far as it arises out of sales made in pursuance of contracts relating to goods which were at the date of the contract in existence within the Province.
The turnover arising out of transactions amounting to Rs. 5,35,404-15-0 is liable to sales tax in so far as it arises out of sales made in pursuance of contracts relating to goods which were at the date of the contract in existence within the Province.
-
1970 (4) TMI 127 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the transactions referred to are "sales" within the meaning of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, or whether they were merely works contracts?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. Mere transfer of property in goods used in the performance of a contract is not sufficient; to constitute a sale there must be an agreement express or implied relating to the sale of goods and completion of the agreement by passing of the title in the very goods contracted to be sold. Ultimately the true effect of an accretion made pursuant to a contract has to be judged, not by an artificial rule that the accretion may be presumed to have become by virtue of affixing to a chattel, part of that chattel, but from the intention of the parties to the contract
-
1970 (4) TMI 125 - SUPREME COURT
It has been pointed out that the High Court proceeded to decide whether the banians and chaddies were included in the term "hosiery products ". Such a decision should not have been given by the High Court but should have been left to the assessing authorities dealing with each individual case. In our judgment the High Court ought not to have gone into that matter as it was for the assessing authorities to decide in each case whether the goods which had been subjected to tax were hosiery products.
-
1970 (4) TMI 124 - SUPREME COURT
Whether medicinal or toilet preparations containing alcohol were exempt from the payment of tax under the East Punjab General Sales Tax Act?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The High Court was right in saying that there was nothing in section 8 to indicate that the words "former enactment" meant only a Central enactment and not a State enactment and that the courts would not be justified to read in that section words which were not there and to place a narrow and limited construction on the words "former enactment". It has not been disputed on behalf of the appellant that if section 8 is applicable the respondent would be exempt from payment of tax under the Act on the alcoholic preparations on which excise duty is being levied under the provisions of the Central Act.
-
1970 (4) TMI 123 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the company charged any profit apart from storage charges for supplying cement and structural steel?
Whether the difference between the price charged to the contractors and the price paid by the company to its suppliers for bricks was not in respect of storage and other incidental charges?
Held that:- Appeal allowed & order passed by the High Court is set aside. In the case of bricks, on the evidence the cost price of bricks supplied to the contractors worked out to Rs. 39-8-0 and the company had charged Rs. 40 per thousand. But in working out the average rate of Rs. 39-8-0 the overhead expenditure of management for "work-charged personnel" was to be taken into account and it was not possible to determine the exact transport charges. We agree with the Tribunal that even in respect of the bricks the rate of Rs. 40 per thousand charged by the company did not leave any profit to it.
-
1970 (4) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... ) In view of the controversies existing between the parties with regard to the matter pending before the Calcutta High Court, I am of the opinion that the dispute raised by the respondent-company is bona fide and that till it is clearly established that the respondent-company is indebted to the petitioner-company, it is not just or proper to wind up the respondent-company. It is true that some other creditors have also taken out applications for winding up the respondent-company. But that is not the sole criterion to decide that the respondent-company is liable to be wound up, in this case, at the instance of the petitioner-company. The petitioner-company could have waited till the proceeding before the Calcutta High Court came to a finality, and I do not think that the petitioner-company was well advised in rushing up to this court with this petition for winding up. In this view, I dismiss the petition. But, in the circumstances, the parties will bear their respective costs.
-
1970 (4) TMI 81 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Winding up – Debts of all descriptions to be admitted to proof ... ... ... ... ..... Ex parte Chatterton 1907 2 KBD 23 (CA), which runs as follows If there be a judgment it is not necessary to show fraud or collusion. It is sufficient, in the language of Lord Esher, to show miscarriage of justice, that is to say, that for some good reasons there ought not to have been a judgment. On the basis of these authorities, I am satisfied that it was open to the official liquidator to go behind the decree passed by the Munsif in Suit No. 457 of 1947 and to consider whether it was valid. As already pointed out, once that decree is held to be open to investigation it at once becomes apparent that it was passed in error, since it runs counter to the decision of this court given in Special Appeal No. 430 of 1955. The official liquidator was thus right in refusing to accept the claims of Gyan Chand Raidani, both for the period between October, 1947, and June, 1949, and for the period between October, 1942, and September, 1947. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.
-
1970 (4) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... (according to annexure B to Company Application No. 4 of 1969), will of course have to be adjusted but no further deduction can be allowed These two applications are therefore allowed, except as regards the prayer for handing over possession, which is no longer pressed by the official liquidator. Under section 446 of the Companies Act the claim of the official liquidator is hereby decreed against Bhagwat Saran Garg and Mukat Saran Garg for the rent of the leased premises from December 1, 1964, to November 30, 1968, at the rate of Rs. 50,000 per annum, and for damages for the use and occupation of the premises at the same rate from December 1, 1968, up to the date of this order, with interest (past pendente lite and future) on all these amounts at the rate of 6 per annum. (The sum of Rs. 1,619.42 already paid on December 30, 1968, will be adjusted against these dues, when the decree is drawn up). In addition, the official liquidator is awarded a sum of Rs. 200 by way of costs.
-
1970 (4) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... panies Act no proceedings could be taken against the directors and employees of the company as a winding-up order had been passed against the company and the company had been dissolved on 24th November 1967. This argument is wholly without merit. Section 446 of the Companies Act only bars proceedings against the company where a winding-up order has been made or the official liquidator has been appointed as provisional liquidator except by leave of the court. This provision does not bar criminal proceedings against the employees of the company for cheating or other offences. Where criminal proceedings for cheating are not against the company but against the manager or directors of the company, leave of the court is not necessary as the proceedings cannot be said to be against the company. The company cannot be charged with cheating not having the mens rea requisite for the offence of cheating. The rest of the judgment is not material for the purposes of this report. mdash Ed.
-
1970 (4) TMI 62 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MARDAS
Dutiability - Marketability - Licensing/Registration ... ... ... ... ..... on to undertake such onerous and inconvenient responsibilities, there should be an express statutory provision compelling him to take out the licence. Here there is no notification as yet which ordains such a mandate. In the absence of any guidelines or prescription as envisaged under Section 6 the respondents did not have the requisite authority to issue the impugned order on May 4, 1968. To wit, the respondents, as the law stood, had no jurisdiction to ask the petitioner to take immediate steps to take out a Central Excise licence and observe all Central Excise formalities. The petitioner succeeds on both the points. The rule nisi is made absolute. The Writ Petition is allowed with costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Memorandum of Costs in W.P. No. 1904 of 1968 Petitioner s Costs Stamp for Vakalatnama 3.00 Doused for the Writ Petition 25.00 Advocate s fee (not certified) 0.00 Batta and postage 6.00 Translation and printing or typing charges 0.00 34.00 (Rupees thirty four only).
-
1970 (4) TMI 61 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Confiscation and penalty (Customs) ... ... ... ... ..... , it was necessary for the authorities to come to a finding that the peitioner had knowledge or had reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation. Such a finding is not there in the order of adjudication. 16.Having regard to my finding on the question of onus, I am not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of these contentions which I have briefly recorded above. I make it clear however that it will be open to the petitioner to have these questions adjudicated in appropriate proceedings if so advised. 17.In the result, this application succeeds and the Rule is made ab-solute. There will be a Writ in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the order of adjudication dated the 18th October, 1965 passed by the respondent No. 2 and a Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the order of adjudication in any manner whatsoever. The respondents would, however, be at liberty to proceed according to law.
-
1970 (4) TMI 60 - SUPREME COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the exemption in respect of G. K. Hospital and the adjoining land of 1.38 cents under section 5(1)(xiv) of the Gift-tax Act ?
Held that:- The donor is exempt under section 5(1)(xiv) from liability to pay tax only if the gift is in the course of carrying on a business, profession or vocation and is made bona fide for the purpose of such business, profession or vocation. The clause does not enact that a gift made by a person carrying on any business is exempt from tax, nor does it provide that a gift is exempt from tax merely because the property is used for the purpose for which it was used by the donor. Without deciding whether the test of " commercial expediency " is strictly appropriate to the claim for exemption under section 5(1)(xiv), we are of the view that there is no evidence on the record to prove that the gift to Thomas was " in the course of carrying on the business " of the donor, and " for the purpose of the business. " Appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High Court is set aside
-
1970 (4) TMI 59 - SUPREME COURT
Whether Parliament had no power to legislate with respect to taxes on gifts of lands and buildings ?
Held that:- The pith and substance of the Gift-tax Act is to place the tax on the gift of property which may include lands and buildings. It is not a tax imposed directly upon the lands and buildings but is a tax upon the value of the total gifts made in a year which is above the exempted limit. There is no tax upon lands or buildings as units of taxation. Indeed, the lands and buildings are valued to find out the total amount of the gift and what is taxed is the gift. The value of the lands and buildings in only the measure of the value of the gift. A gift-tax is thus not a tax on lands and buildings as such (which is a tax resting upon general ownership of lands and buildings) but is a levy upon a particular use, which is transmission of title by gift. The two are not the same thing and the incidence of the tax is not the same. Since entry 49 of the State List contemplates a tax directly levied by reason of the ground ownership of lands and buildings, it cannot include the gift-tax as levied by Parliament. There being no other entry which covers a gift-tax, the residuary powers of Parliament could be exercised to enact a law. The appeals must, therefore, be allowed
-
1970 (4) TMI 58 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Computation of capital gains realised in son's life-time when trust-deed provides that income is to be payable to son for life and after son's life-time the corpus is to be divided among the children
-
1970 (4) TMI 57 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
U.P. Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1948 - lands were held on tenancy by the members of the family - Whether the finding of the Revision Board that income from the holdings recorded in the name of the wife and son of Maharaj Kumar was the income of the assessee's family is legally sustainable - Held, no
-
1970 (4) TMI 56 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Whether the amount being provision for payment of income-tax and super-tax, provision for proposed dividend was deductible in computing the net wealth of the assessee
-
1970 (4) TMI 55 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Assessee is a public limited company, limited by shares. It derives income from several sources including certain business operations which are carried out in India and abroad - foreign govt. paid compensation to the assessee in the shape of timber - whether the timber received would be a capital asset and the profit made by the assessee on the sale of such timber is a revenue receipt
-
1970 (4) TMI 54 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Expenditure - claim for deduction - exchange loss in respect of remittances of profit from Pakistan - law charges incurred in respect of business profits tax appeals - law charges incurred for effecting changes in the existing managing agency agreement - interest paid on funds invested in shares which produced no dividend income
-
1970 (4) TMI 53 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Whether penalty levied under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, bad been validly reduced
|
