|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 248 Records
-
1988 (7) TMI 380 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of Bhimraj Madanlal v. State of Bihar 1984 56 STC 273 wherein it was held The information envisaged by section 18(1) of the Act for purposes of reassessment need not necessarily spring from a source external or extraneous to the original record and that having second thoughts or a mere change of opinion by the prescribed authority on the same set of facts and materials on the record would not constitute information under section 18(1) of the Act for the purposes of reassessment. 9.. Since the contention raised by the petitioner s counsel is fully covered by the said Full Bench decision of this Court and on facts of the present case the admitted position is that the reassessment was sought to be made on the basis of the same materials which were already on record, the petitioner s contention is upheld and the application is allowed. The order contained in annexure-2 is quashed, but in the circumstances of the case there will be no order as to costs. Writ application allowed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 379 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... lity of the second part of section 5(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, it must be proved that the sale was effected in favour of a foreign buyer. This view of the Board runs counter to the decision of this Court in 1982 50 STC 287 (Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of M.P.). Our answer to the question reframed by us is, therefore, that without giving a finding on the question as to whether the sales in question were effected by a transfer of documents of title to the goods and whether the sales in question had taken place after the goods had crossed the customs frontiers of India, the Board of Revenue was not justified in holding that the sales amounting to Rs. 1,21,96,490 were not covered by the second part of sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, and could not be held to be sales in the course of export. 6.. Reference answered accordingly. In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1988 (7) TMI 378 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... administer this branch is properly or fully in the know of things-a deplorable situation indeed. The Member (Board of Revenue) assured us that he will look into the matter personally and also take all effective steps to see that the statutory authorities function independently and in accordance with law. The learned Government Pleader also assured us in that behalf. In view of the above assurances, as at present advised, we do not propose to proceed further in the matter. 8.. The judgment of the learned single judge is unsustainable. It is set aside. The writ appeal is allowed. Exhibit P9 order is quashed. The first respondent is directed to dispose of the stay petition, pending before him, in accordance with law. Till then no recovery proceedings shall be taken. A copy of this judgment will be sent to the Chief Secretary to Government, for information and appropriate action. Issue carbon copy of this judgment to counsel for the parties, on usual terms. Writ appeal allowed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 377 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 5 of the statement. Under these circumstances, the Revenue was justified in taking recourse to the best judgment provision for the limited purpose of estimating the purchases made from unregistered dealers. The appellate authority estimated the purchase from unregistered dealers at Rs. 10 lakhs (5 lakhs towards raw material and stores 2 lakhs towards maintenance and repair purchases 3 lakhs towards purchase of construction material). Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this estimate cannot be viewed as excessive or capricious. We see no reason to interfere with the orders of the Revenue on this account. Learned counsel for the assessee was unable to assail the aforesaid finding by the Board. Therefore, our answer to question No. (6), as reframed by us, is in the affirmative and against the assessee. 8.. Reference answered accordingly. In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1988 (7) TMI 376 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the purchase of pulses effected by the assessee prior to May 1, 1977, could be subjected to tax under section 3-D(2) of the Sales Tax Act?
Whether a provision in statute or rule is mandatory or directory?
Held that:- We are clearly of the opinion that the learned single Judge, while holding that the law contemplates and entitles the assessee to lead evidence to the satisfaction of the assessing authority had not correctly appreciated the mode of proof provided under the rules for rebutting the presumption in order to get benefit of tax exemption.
The result of the aforesaid discussion is that sub-section (7)(a) of section 3-D of the Act is mandatory in nature and unless the proof is given, as required therein, it cannot be said that onus has been discharged and the assessee would not be entitled to exemption by examining other evidence. In conclusion we hold that the view taken by the sales tax authority does not suffer from any legal infirmity. The sales tax revision is accordingly dismissed but there shall be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (7) TMI 367 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. was an "own" source of generation of electricity for the Hindalco?
Whether the order passed by the State Government, having regard to the nature of the order passed, was in accordance with the principles of natural justice in so far as the same were applicable to the facts of this case?
Held that:- The High Court was in error in setting aside the order of the State Government in its entirety. The High Court should have allowed the claim of Hindalco for the reduced rate of bill on the basis that Renusagar Power Plant was its own source of generation under section 3(1)(c) and the bills should have been made by the Board on that basis. But the High Court was in error in upholding the respondents' contention that the State Government acted improperly and not in terms of section 3(4) of the Act and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. We, therefore, allow the appeal to the extent indicated above and set aside the judgment of the Allahabad High Court to that extent and restore the State Government's impugned order subject to the modification of the bills on the basis of own source of generation. We, therefore, direct that the electricity bills must be so made as to give Hindalco the benefit of the rate applicable to its own source of generation from Renusagar Plant.
-
1988 (7) TMI 366 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Oppression of mismanagement – Powers of Government of prevent ... ... ... ... ..... ection 408 of the Companies Act was wholly absent in the instant case and I further hold that the Company Law Board had no jurisdiction under section 408 of the Companies Act to regulate the said scheme of the petitioner in view of the directions issued by the Reserve Bank of India under the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act and as such the impugned order dated November 13, 1987, passed by the Company Law Board under section 408 of the Companies Act was illegal and void. In the result, the writ application succeeds. Rule is made absolute. A writ in the nature of certiorari do issue directing the respondents show-cause notice dated March 13, 1987, and the impugned order dated November 13, 1987, and the writ in the nature of mandamus do issue to cancel, withdraw and rescind the show-cause notice dated March 13, 1987, and the impugned order dated November 13, 1987. There will be no order as to costs. No order is passed on the application for vacating the interim order.
-
1988 (7) TMI 349 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... the price ndash (a) to the seller in a suit by him for the amount of the price 8209 from the date of the tender of the good or from the date on which the price was payable The section gives a wide discretion to the court to award interest at such rates as it thinks fit on the price of goods supplied. The seller of the goods is entitled to interest from the date of delivery of goods. The petitioners are entitled to interest by way of damages. Accordingly, I allow them interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date the amount fell due till the date of its payment. Issue No. 3 No evidence worth the name has been led by the respondent. The petitioners have successfully proved that a sum of Rs. 25,743.84 is due to them from the respondent. Issue No. 3, is thus, decided against the respondent. For the reasons aforesaid I pass a decree with costs for the recovery of Rs. 25,743.84 along with interest at 9 per cent. per annum from the date the amount fell due till payment of the same.
-
1988 (7) TMI 348 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Oppression and Mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... f this, signed copy of the operative part of this judgment and order. Cross-order for discovery within a fortnight thereafter and inspection forthwith thereafter. Liberty to mention for early hearing. The special officer shall get the accounts audited by any auditor, preferably Price Waterhouse and Co. to be appointed by him and not by the auditor of the company. All the accounts shall be audited from April 1, 1985, onwards. It is stated that the rectification application was allowed by the company court and an appeal was preferred by the company. The said appeal has been dismissed by the Division Bench against which a special leave petition has been filed before the Supreme Court and special leave has been granted. Mr. Sen, appearing for the company, asks for stay. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, stay is refused. The special officer and all parties shall act on a signed copy of the operative portion of this judgment and order upon usual undertaking.
-
1988 (7) TMI 333 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the first meeting of the corporation called for that day at 2.45 p.m. by the Municipal Commissioner, respondent No. 9, who presided over the meeting, was adjourned for the day or adjourned sine die and, therefore, had to be called on some subsequent date to be fixed by him and thus necessitated the giving of seven days' clear notice as required by rule 1(h), Chapter II of the Rules framed under section 453 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. On an overall view of the facts and circumstances, no hesitation in upholding the finding that the first meeting of the Municipal Corporation fixed by the Municipal Commissioner for May 6, 1988, was not "adjourned for the day" or "adjourned sine di" but had only been put off to a later hour, i.e., the proceedings had only been suspended, to be re-commenced when peace and order were restored.
-
1988 (7) TMI 332 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Public deposits, Director number of, Winding up - Offences by officers of companies in liquidation, Powers of court to grant relief in certain cases
-
1988 (7) TMI 331 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Winding up – Exclusion of certain time in computing periods of limitation ... ... ... ... ..... ed. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that there are certain corrections in exhibit A-2(d) minutes book and two minutes books were maintained for the same period and that is highly suspicious. In this connection, it may be mentioned that exhibit A-2(d) and several other resolutions were passed in board meetings attended by the respondent in C.C. No. 210 of 1987. It was up to him to explain all these matters in court. He did not go to the box. Therefore, such contentions cannot be accepted. In the claims, twelve per cent. interest from March 23, 1982, is claimed. There is no resolution in the minutes regarding payment of interest. Under the circumstances, interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum from the date of filing of the claim, namely, April 7, 1987, alone is allowed. The claims are decreed for the respective principal amounts together with interest at six per cent. on the respective principal amounts from April 7, 1987, till date of payment with costs.
-
1988 (7) TMI 315 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... as since been given by the Departmental authorities and therefore, the cross-objection did not survive. In view of this, we dismiss the cross-objection. 5. emsp shy So far as the appeal by the Department is concerned, we observe that no legal basis has been laid for setting aside the order of the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) has merely followed the order of the Tribunal while remanding the case. The Appellant Collector rsquo s plea is that an appeal has been filed in the Supreme Court against the order of the Tribunal. This cannot constitute a ground for setting aside the order as pleaded. 6. emsp shy The Department can keep alive its rights by filing an appeal against this order if they so choose and in case they succeed in the appeal before the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court, the consequential relief will flow to them in this matter also. 7. emsp shy In view of the above, we find no reason to accede to the plea of the Appellant Collector and dismiss the appeal.
-
1988 (7) TMI 313 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... to allow advancing of the new plea and filing of the fresh documents. But we do realize that the matter is a recurring one and has far- reaching implications for the industry - not only for the past period but also for the future. It would, therefore, be necessary to face it and sort it out. The sooner it is done, the better. The best authority to go into the new question of fact would be the original authority, that is, the Assistant Collector. This would mean a remand of the matter to the Assistant Collector. It would be open to the parties to adduce their respective evidence on the new plea before the Assistant Collector and he could undertake such verification and inquiries as considered necessary by him. In the circumstances, it is unnecessary for us to pass formal orders on the Misc. Application filed by the appellants for admission of fresh documents. 5. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter to the Assistant Collector for a fresh decision.
-
1988 (7) TMI 312 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Exemption to excisable goods ... ... ... ... ..... No. 118/75, dated 30-04-1975, which, however, did not make any mention of workshop. In 1983 E.L.T. 209 (Kar.) - M/s. India Sugars and Refineries Ltd. v. Union of India and Others, interpretation of a notification has been discussed - ldquo If an expression in Notification is used in plain and meaningful language there is no scope for assuming an ambiguity and trying to interpret it on a supposed intention of the makers of the notification rdquo . Further in 1983 E.L.T. 1017 (CEGAT) - Hercules Tyre and Rubber Industries v. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh, it has been indicated that ldquo the notification should not be construed in a manner which defeats the very purpose of the notification. rdquo 4. Considering the views held in the various Courts and decisions of the Tribunal, interpretation of a notification calls for the clear intent of the makers of the law and not interpret the same in ambiguous connotations. The appeal is, therefore, maintainable and is allowed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 310 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Denial of renewal or cancellation of licence ... ... ... ... ..... he application for renewal of licence should not be rejected if the licensee bring to the notice of the licensing authority that the order on which the licensing authority relies for taking action against the licensee is under appeal. The licensing authority should await the result of the app al. rdquo 27. It is true that Shri Prabhu had brought to our notice that the adjudicating orders have become final since the Tribunal had rejected the appeals filed by the present appellant. But then, we find that the rejection of the appeals were not on merits. We further find that the appeals which were considered on merits filed by the other Gold Dealers were allowed. In the circumstances, we are of the view that for a single act of contravention drastic actions such as denial of renewal and cancellation of licence particularly in the absence of Criminal Prosecution should not be resorted to. 28. For the foregoing reasons, we allow this appeal and set aside the order of the Collector.
-
1988 (7) TMI 309 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Import of -Rags ... ... ... ... ..... t completely pre-mutilated. As a matter of fact, while permitting redemption on payment of fine, the Addl. Collector had directed that the goods should be cleared after proper mutilation. The expression used by the Examining Officer as well as the Collr. namely, ldquo proper mutilation rdquo is a vague term. Neither the examiner nor the Collr. had stated the extent of mutilation required. The expression ldquo completely mutilated rdquo in the I.T.C. Policy is not defined anywhere. No evidence is also adduced as to the standard of mutilation required to allow the import. 9. We see no reason to depart from the findings of the Tribunal, contained in the earlier orders (supra) especially in the orders passed by the NRB. Respectfully following the same we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals. We further order that if the goods are in Customs control in any of the appeals the Customs are at liberty to order further mutilation. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
-
1988 (7) TMI 306 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Confiscation - Canalised goods ... ... ... ... ..... so some force in the contention of Shri Patel that for the purpose of Customs duty the Customs have charged additional customs duty. If the goods imported are drugs no additional customs duty should have been levied or collected since the drugs are exempted from payment of additional customs duty. Above all, the subsequent conduct of the Customs House in clearing the identical goods without raising any objection again support the importers rsquo contention that the goods imported by them are not drugs and were not canalised during the Policy AM-83. It is not in a single instance the objection was not taken. It was in respect of series of imports. Having regard to the course of conduct of the Customs, even if the goods are treated as canalised item there was no justification to impose any fine. 9. On consideration of all aspects, I allow this appeal, set aside the confiscation consequently the fine levied in lieu of confiscation. The appellants be granted consequential relief.
-
1988 (7) TMI 304 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Cupro staple fibre ... ... ... ... ..... operty. We hereby certify that an analyses table of Bomberg staple fibres are as follows . 6. emsp From this, it is seen that they are not claiming that the goods imported by the appellants are the same as viscose fibre but all they say is that they belong to the same family as viscose fibres. The two members of the same family cannot be treated to be the same unless it is specifically stated so in the notification. 7. emsp In view of what we have discussed above, it cannot be held that the goods imported are the same as viscose fibres. However, we find subsequently the benefit of exemption was extended to the goods of the type imported by the appellants. This exemption cannot have retrospective effect. In view of this, we hold that the Collector of Customs (Appeals) was in error in holding that the benefit of Notification No. 388/76 was available in respect of the goods imported and we therefore, set aside the order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) and allow the appeal.
-
1988 (7) TMI 303 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... tant Collector of Central Excise, IDO, Mysore and Others - 1986 (24) E.L.T. 226. The impugned products in that case were bolts, nuts and rods, but since they were of special type specifically manufactured to specifications and as per drawings for the assembly of the motor cycles manufactured by the petitioner company, it was held that the impugned products would not be classifiable as mere bolts and nuts under Central Excise Tariff Item 52 but they were to be considered as integral part of the machine for which they were designed with a distinct and specific function in the operation of motor cycles of which they were component parts. 12. We hold that the ratio of the Karnataka High Court decision is squarely applicable to this case. The goods in question would more appropriately be treated as component parts of projects and mining machinery and as such classifiable under Central Excise Tariff Item 68 and not Central Excise Tariff Item 52. Ordered accordingly. Appeal allowed.
........
|
