|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 437 Records
-
1997 (3) TMI 586 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... ustrial unit together with its plant and building. If it had not taken over the old industrial unit it would still have been categorised as a new manufacturing unit with regard to its remaining installed capacity of 28 M.T. guar gum powder and on that basis it would have claimed exemption from tax on sale to or purchase by it of the raw material for the manufacture of goods. Balancing these two positions has became an essential fact which cannot but merit our careful consideration and deep reflection. In view of these circumstances we hold that the industrial unit shall be treated to be a new manufacturing unit for the purposes of notification dated June 13, 1994 only so far as its additional installed capacity of 28 M.T. guar gum powder is concerned. It will not get the benefit of tax exemption with regard to the remaining installed capacity of 14 M.T. guar gum powder. The tax exemption shall be apportioned accordingly. We make no order as to costs. Petition partly allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 585 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cified therein. This would clearly show that the Government intended the provisions in S.R.O. No. 643/81 to continue in force till S.R.O. No. 372/92 was issued on March 31, 1992 with effect from April 1, 1992. 9.. Apart from the above, we are of the view that even if there had been violation, it was only technical in nature. The contents of the declaration as contemplated in form 18 provided under sub-section (7) and the declaration provided under S.R.O. No. 643/81 are more or less of same nature. For this reason also we are of the view that the authorities below have wrongly declined the claim put forward by the assessee for being assessed at the rate of 4 per cent in respect of the rubber sheets purchased from it for the manufacture of chappals. We therefore set aside the orders of two appellate authorities and direct the assessing authority to modify the assessment order in the light of the findings in this judgment. The revision stands allowed as above. Petition allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 584 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... e provisions of section 12 of the Act were not attracted. Admittedly, the assessee collected tax on the sale of said bardana and duly deposited the amount so collected in the Government treasury as is mentioned in the abovequoted order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). Penalty equal to the amount of tax collected, i.e., Rs. 10,002.90 was imposed under section 16(1)(j) of the Act for collecting the amount of tax of Rs. 10,002.90 without authority of law. As such it cannot be said that for any reason the whole or any part of the business of the assessee-respondent escaped assessment from tax. There is nothing in the record to indicate that amount so collected by the assessee-respondent was refunded to him. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no justification to take proceedings under section 12 of the Act against the assessee. There was no question of double taxation. 7.. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed. No order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 583 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... urchased was utilised for the generation of power. It was not utilised for manufacture of the goods for sale in execution of works contract. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are in complete agreement with the views of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer. It is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. We do not therefore, find any good ground to interfere, with the order under challenge. 16.. In view of the above the writ petitions are accepted. It is hereby declared that the rate of tax applicable at the relevant time to the purchase of HSD, LDO and lubricants made by the petitioner-company from the 10C for the generation of electricity shall be exigible to tax at 4 per cent as provided for under section 5CCCC, RST Act. The order dated May 15, 1984 imposing penalty is quashed. The excess tax collected from the petitioner-company shall be refunded at interest of 15 per cent per annum from the date of deposit. No order as to costs. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 582 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... atute can well be construed by reference to such exposition, in the absence of anything in the statute to indicate the contrary. Indeed, such interpretation should be shown to be clearly wrong before it is overturned . Reference of Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam v. Pio Food Packers 1980 46 STC 63 (SC) and Sterling Foods v. State of Karnataka 1986 63 STC 239 (SC) and Calcutta Label Works v. Commercial Tax Officer, Monohar Katra Charge 1994 95 STC 122 (WBTT) may be made here. 7.. Para No. 7 of the order of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer runs as under 7. No arguments on the basic question of fact as to why the commodity exported be viewed different from one sold by the assessee, could be convincingly given to us by the learned counsel of the department. Same is the position here. Thus there is no substance in the revision. 8.. Accordingly, the application for revision is dismissed. No order as to cost. Application dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 581 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... axing officers though they ought not to have done so, could not be altogether rejected as borne out of imagination or as a pure afterthought. Hence, on an overall consideration of the matter also, we are of the view that the learned single Judge could not be said to have exercised his discretion in an unreasonable manner or in any manner opposed to law warranting our interference. The nature and extent of an opportunity to be accorded in a given case depends upon the magnitude of the problem as also the merits of the claim and the exigencies of a situation and if the learned single Judge has taken into account all these aspects to grant a relief in the nature of a further opportunity only to enable the assessee to produce their accounts and other records, with a direction to the authorities to redo the assessment, we see no error, at any rate patent error of law, warranting our interference. The appeals, therefore, fail and shall stand dismissed. No costs. Appeals dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 580 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cessary to deal with them in detail. 36.. For the reasons stated, there is no merit in any one of the contentions raised by the petitioners in these petitions. Accordingly, they are liable to be rejected. Hence, they are rejected. 37.. In the result, the following order is made (a) Petitions are dismissed. Rule discharged. (b) Petitioners are permitted to file objections, if any, in such of those petitions, where the assessees are before this Court at the stage of show cause notice/pre-assessment notices within four weeks from today. In such of those petitions, where assessment orders are called in question, petitioners are permitted to file appeals within four weeks from today and if such appeals are filed within the time granted by this Court, appellate authorities are directed to decide the appeals on merits without reference to the period of limitation. (c) In the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 579 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee, it is subjected to tax the next year in the manner prescribed and also that if the assessee fails to report such payment to him, he shall be subjected to best judgment. Section 14-A being a specific provision regarding price variation, it shall prevail to the extent justified by facts of any particular case by application of the principles of generalia specialibus non derogant. This is not to say that in all cases where the assessee pleads a dispute about the price variation the amount would not be includible in the turnover, but a discretion is vested in the authorities when a genuine case is pleaded and established, to resort to section 14-A. The discretion has to be judicially exercised on equitable principles. It is only such view that has been taken by the Tribunal and we think, rightly. Considering the matter from such view, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the Tribunal. The revision hence has no merit and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 578 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ia Ltd. v. State of Haryana 1990 76 STC 71 has since been set aside by the Supreme Court in a review petition filed by the State of Haryana. Reported in 1997 105 STC 465 (P and H). 6.. Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner wanted to challenge the levy of purchase tax by taking into consideration the incidental charges. Shri Aggarwal made strenuous efforts to persuade us to go into the correctness of the order passed by the Assessing Authority but we do not find any reason to accept the submission of Shri Aggarwal because in the writ petition there is no challenge to the amount of purchase tax imposed on the petitioner. No prayer has been made by the petitioner to quash any particular order passed by the Assessing Authority. In the absence of factual foundation and a specific prayer to that effect, we do not find any justification to entertain the argument of Shri Aggarwal. For the reasons mentioned above, the writ petition is dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 577 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... inion, the manner in which the Tribunal has decided the appeal cannot in any manner be treated as satisfactory. The learned Tribunal should have kept in view the fact that the order of penalty passed by the Excise and Taxation Officer had grave consequences upon the business of the petitioner and, therefore, it was its duty to deal with the points raised on behalf of the petitioner. That was the least which the Tribunal should have done while exercising quasi-judicial powers. Failure of the Tribunal to do so leads to an irresistible inference that the order passed by it is a non-speaking order and, therefore, it is contrary to the principles of natural justice. 23.. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order, annexure P1, is quashed. The Sales Tax Tribunal, Punjab, is directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Tribunal shall pass a speaking order while deciding the appeal of the petitioner. Writ petition allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 576 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... h difference. No reason has been given why maximum penalty was justified in the present case. Even during assessment proceeding of the dealer, the assessing authority could not point out the alleged breach for which penalty was levied. It is, therefore, clear that, in the circumstances of this case, the penalty should have been equal to the amount of tax saved and not more. 19.. In view of the above, both revisions are allowed in part. It is directed that the amount of penalty should be reduced to the amount equal to the difference between the amount of tax on the sale or purchase of the goods, payable under section 4-B of the Act and the amount of tax payable under any other provisions of this Act. The Tribunal shall determine the amount of penalty payable by the revisionist in the light of above under section 11(8) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. Rest of the revisions are dismissed. Cost on the parties. Let copies of the judgment be sent to the concerned Tribunal without delay.
-
1997 (3) TMI 575 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... assessment in respect of the same goods was done in any other State under the C.S.T. Act. In the light of this factual finding that the petitioner had undertaken erection work in the nature of a works contract and the works completed in Kerala and appropriation of goods did take place in Kerala and there is no question of inter-State sales in this case. 9.. This is admittedly execution of a works contract within the meaning of the works contract. As per explanation 4 the sale or purchase of goods shall be deemed to have taken place at the time of their appropriation to the contract of sale or purchase by the seller or by the purchaser whether the assent of the other party is prior or subsequent of such appropriation. In the light of the factual position which cannot be disputed, the petitioner is liable for the works contract. For all these reasons I do not find any grounds to grant the relief sought for and accordingly the original petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 574 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... Act, 1957 (Central Act 58 of 1957) and which are exempt from the payment of tax by or under the provisions of this Act. (2) Where any raw material purchased by a registered dealer under subsection (1) is utilised by him for any purpose other than a purpose specified therein, such dealer shall be liable to pay as penalty, such amount, not less than the difference between the amount of tax on the sale of such raw material at the full rate applicable thereto under section 5 and the amount of tax payable under subsection (1) but not exceeding one and one quarter times the amount of tax at such full rate, as the assessing authority may determine, having regard to the circumstances in which such use was made. 11.. The purchase of HSD by the RSEB for generation of electric energy to be sold by it would therefore definitely get covered by the provisions of section 5C of the RST Act. 12.. The revision is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (3) TMI 573 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is non-comprehensible as unless the polythene bags are plastic containers, they cannot be containers at all, in which event they would not be taxable under entry No. 19 at all. The argument is self-defeating. As a matter of fact, polythene bags and plastic bags have now been included, with effect from August 1, 1996, by amendment Act 27 of 1996 in entry No. 187 which would show that plastic bags and polythene bags have been separately considered for the purpose of taxation and the Legislature has now made it clear that while plain plastic is leviable to tax at 5 per cent, polythene bags and plastic bags are chargeable with tax of 10 per cent with effect from April 1, 1995. Read with the G.O. that would mean that exemption of tax to the extent the tax is levied on the purchase of plastic is available on polythene/plastic bags. In that view of the matter, we are in agreement with the judgment of the Tribunal and the revision is dismissed as having no merit. Petition dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 572 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... t components for manufacturing or processing other parts. I follow the dictum in Televista Electronics s case that component parts are different from spare parts and that these terms are not interchangeable. (16) Learned A.R. submitted that these items are mere components and by using them and subjecting them to further processing or assembling a complete part can be prepared. Nuts, plates, pins, levers, etc., can, of course, be used in preparing parts for motor vehicles but at the same time they can also be utilised in preparing parts of other machineries like crusher, cranes, tractors, etc. Hence it will be erroneous to categorise these items to be the exclusive items of motor vehicles. They correspond to parts of general nature capable of being used in various machineries. We agree with these observations. We don t find any substance in the application for revision. 11.. Accordingly, the applications for revision are dismissed. No order as to costs. Application dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 571 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... d. case 1987 64 STC 96 (Raj) was also distinguishable. As in that case the assessee was not also carrying on the business of selling empty tins and there was no express or implied contract of sale of the packing material. On this basis it was held that empty tins used as packing material for vegetable oil was to be taxed at 3 per cent under the notification dated March 27, 1971. 12.. In Hemraj Udyog v. Commercial Taxes Officer 1989 73 STC 243, the Rajasthan High Court followed its earlier decision between the same parties cited in 1987 67 STC 229. 13.. A careful consideration of the law cited above would indicate that if there is an agreement implied or otherwise to sell the tins along with the vegetable or edible oil and the assessee is in the business of purchase and sale of tins then the tins so sold along with the edible oil are liable to be taxed at the rate applicable to such tins, i.e., 3 per cent. 14.. The revision stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
-
1997 (3) TMI 570 - SUPREME COURT
Whether there was a need "to establish a special organ/agency to regularly collect information and pursue cases against such mafia elements?
Whether the supporting material placed before the Vohra Committee can be disclosed for the benefit of the general public?
Held that:- The disclosure of the supporting material placed before the Vohra Committee to the public at large would, instead of aiding the interest of the public, be severely and detrimentally injurious to it. In that view of the matter, we think there is no necessity for us to express ourselves on the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
the grave nature of the issue demands deft handling by an all-powerful body which will have the means and the power to fully secure its foundational ends. The Nodal Agency, in its present form, comprises senior bureaucrats of the highest level. While it is suited to coordinate an exchange of information between different investigating agencies, its composition is such that it may not be viewed by the public as completely independent or immune from pressures of every kind. It is, therefore, not suitable for pursuing an investigation of this kind and taking it to the state of prosecution where may be nexus between the persons under investigation and powerful persons such as those referred to in the Vohra Committee Report. In view of the seriousness of the charges involved and the clout wielded by those who are likely to become the focus of investigation, it is necessary that the body which is entrusted with the task of following the investigation through to the stage of prosecution, be such that it is capable of enjoying the complete trust and confidence of the people.
We are, therefore, of the view that the matter needs to be addressed by a body which function with the highest degree of independence, being completely free from every conceivable influence and pressure. Such a body must possess the necessary powers to be able to direct investigation of all charges thoroughly before it decides, if at all, to launch prosecutions. To this end the facilities and services of trained investigators with distinguished records and impeccable credentials must be made available to it. To this end, and in the absence of any existing suitable institution or till its creation, we recommend that a high level committee be appointed by the president of India on the advice or the Prime Minister, and after consultation with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The Committee shall monitor investigations involving the kind of nexus referred to in the Vohra Committee Report and carry out the objectives described earlier.
-
1997 (3) TMI 569 - SUPREME COURT
Offence involving moral turpitude - Whether the appellant had the jurisdiction to suspend the respondent? - Held that:- Appeal allowed. High Court was not justified in quashing the orders of suspension. Unable to agree with the contention of the respondent that there has been no application of mind or the objective consideration of the facts by the appellant before it passed the orders of suspension. As already observed, the very fact that the investigation was conducted by the C.B.I which resulted in the filing of a charge-sheet, alleging various offences having been committed by the respondent, was sufficient for the appellant to conclude that pending prosecution the respondent should be suspended
-
1997 (3) TMI 568 - SUPREME COURT
Whether in view of the repudiation of the liability under clause 13, a dispute was raised which could be referred to arbitration?
Whether the proceedings were barred by clause 19 of the policy?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The forfeiture clause 12 also provides that if the claim is made but rejected, an action or suit must be commenced within three months after such rejection; failing which all benefits under the policy would stand forfeited. So, looked at from any point of view, the suit appears to be filed after the right stood extinguished.
-
1997 (3) TMI 567 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Anti dumping duty - DA has taken into consideration the provisions of Rule 11 of the Anti-Dumping Rules and the Annexure-II to the Rules referred to therein in regard to determination of injury - It is well settled that the DA is required to examine the overall impact of the dumped imports by evaluation of all the economic factors as a whole and not be guided by evaluation of any particular economic criterion - The quantum of anti-dumping duty recommended by the DA and imposed by the Government has also not been assailed before us - The quantum of anti-dumping duty recommended by the DA and imposed by the Government has also not been assailed before us - Appeals are dismissed
........
|
