|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 291 Records
-
1990 (9) TMI 307 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... cameras by the use of enlarger or projector, but not otherwise. The process camera is a commodity different from a photographic camera. Process camera is a technological device for purpose of printing. Strictly it is a sort of a copier. 10.. The use of the word camera alone cannot be a determining factor. The word has various meanings including a dark chamber as well See Shorter Oxford Dictionary . Therefore, by reason of use of the word camera while describing a mechanism meant for printing technology, it cannot be said that it falls within the category of photographic camera. 11.. We are, therefore, in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal below. Question No. 1 is accordingly answered in the negative. The answer to question No. 2 must, as a necessary corollary, be in the affirmative. We answer the points accordingly. 12.. The reference is thus disposed of. P.C. BANERJI (Technical Member).-I agree. L.N. RAY (Judicial Member).-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1990 (9) TMI 306 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t fall within the meaning of the words water fittings is, in our opinion, contrary to the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment. We are, therefore, of the view that the letter dated March 28, 1990 of the Commissioner (CT) addressed to the Chief Engineer (Rural Water Supply), Hyderabad, in so far as it relates to items at serial Nos. 3 and 4, has misinterpreted the decision of the Supreme Court. We have, therefore, set at rest any misunderstanding as to the scope and applicability of the Supreme Court judgment. We may, however, add that if any part of the pipes falling under serial Nos. 3 and 4 of the said letter of the Commissioner dated March 28, 1990 are used as water or sanitary fittings in respect of any building, as explained in detail above, it will be open to the concerned authorities to apply entry 102 of Schedule I to the Act, to that extent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. In the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250.
-
1990 (9) TMI 305 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... procured by the company as the agent it was liable to collect sales tax on such sale in terms of the second proviso to sub-section (4) of section 5 of the Act. Undisputedly the tax was not collected on an erroneous impression whether founded on entry 41 of the Fifth Schedule or the circular, to which we have referred issued by the Commissioner, it cannot be exempted. If exempted, it should be available only if the Government had exercised its power under section 8A of the Act to create such an exemption. In the absence of such exemption being created it was the duty of the assessee-company to collect tax. Having failed to collect tax, it must make good the amount of tax as assessed. 6.. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and dismiss the revision petition recording an answer against the assessee in respect of the question raised in this revision petition. 7.. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1990 (9) TMI 304 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Rs. 3 per tonne (iii) the excise duty paid thereon and (iv) in the case of packed cement, the charges fixed by the Central Government in respect of the packing or the containers under the first proviso to clause 8. 6.. Therefore, pursuant to the Cement Control Order, the assesseecompany was supplying the containers (the cement bags) along with the cement and the sale of cement resulted in the incidental sale of the bags as well impliedly. Therefore, once the cost of bags had been recovered from the purchaser as part of the sale price, then there was no way by which it could be excluded from the sales turnover of the assessee-company in regard to sale of cement. 7.. Therefore, we do not find any error in the order of the appellate authorities as well as the original assessing authority which rectified the order under section 25-A. 8.. We, therefore, dismiss these revision petitions. 9.. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1990 (9) TMI 303 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... stration certificate is valid with effect from 20th July, 1982. The new unit can, therefore, be treated as registered with the Cottage and Small Scale Industries Directorate in terms of the Notification No. 1177-F.T. dated 31st March, 1983. 10.. In view of the reasons given above, this appears to be a fit case for issue of eligibility certificate to the unit manufacturing Jabarandi hair-oil and livasol patent homeopathic medicines with effect from 4th September, 1981. The dealer, however, will not be entitled to tax holiday in respect of any other manufacturing item. 11.. In the premises, the application is liable to succeed and is allowed. The orders of the Assistant Commissioner and Additional Commissioner are hereby set aside with the direction upon the Assistant Commissioner to issue eligibility certificate to the applicant as indicated above. There will be no order for costs. B.C. CHAKRABARTI (Chairman).-I agree. L.N. RAY (Judicial Member).-I agree. Application allowed.
-
1990 (9) TMI 302 - SC ORDER
Whether an agreement for the exploitation of a cinematograph film for distribution and exhibition amounts to sale within the meaning of the Madras General Sales Tax Act?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The High Court answered the question in favour of the assessee placing reliance on its earlier decision in A.V. Meiyappan v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1967 (3) TMI 93 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] which is correct.
-
1990 (9) TMI 296 - SC ORDER
No good reason to interfere with the High Court's order as the High Court has quashed orders of sales tax authorities following the decisions of this Court in Ghanshyamdas v. Regional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax [1963 (8) TMI 2 - SUPREME Court] and Anandji Haridas & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. S.P. Kushare [1967 (9) TMI 132 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA].
-
1990 (9) TMI 288 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Dutiability ... ... ... ... ..... s not adduced any evidence to rebut this finding as to the ldquo unstable nature rdquo of the synthetic resins. In Bhor Industries case 1989 (40) E.L.T. 280 , the Supreme Court has held that marketability is an essential ingredient for excisability. This Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Bakelite Hylam Ltd. 1990 (46) E.L.T. 552 has held that phenol formaldehyde stage lsquo A rsquo resin being unstable and having a short shelf-life and not marketable, is not liable to excise duty under Item 15(A) CET. 8. emsp We see no reason to take a different view from the decision of the Tribunal (supra) which in turn is based upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhor Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise. Respectfully following the ratio of the above decision and since the Revenue has not discharged its duty by adducing evidence that the synthetic resins in dispute are stable and marketable, we uphold the findings of the Collector and dismiss the appeal.
-
1990 (9) TMI 280 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Appeals to High Court ... ... ... ... ..... h I am not concerned at this stage. The discrepancies pointed in the conclusion drawn from Parliament debates are minor and are of not much consequence. Taking into consideration the totality of circumstances placed before this court by the learned Solicitor-General as noticed hereinabove, the case cannot be thrown out without examination on the merits. On the facts, no negligence can be attributed to the appellants. There is nothing to substantiate the plea that the decision to file the appeal is actuated by personal vendetta. It is necessary in public interest to examine the case on the merits. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant has made out sufficient cause and the delay of 120 days in filing the appeal is liable to be condoned. It is clarified that the observations made in this order shall not prejudice the contentions of the parties on the merits of the appeal. The application is, accordingly, allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
-
1990 (9) TMI 272 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... rned single judge that even if part of the debt is disputed, the court should refuse to make an order of winding up, can only mean that where a substantial part of the debt is disputed on a substantial ground, the winding up petition should be dismissed. Court will not refuse to make an order of winding up where the disputed part of the debt is insignificant. What is significant or insignificant will again depend on the facts of each case. In the present case, the company has not been able to raise a bona fide dispute in respect of a significant part of the debt. In view of the above, the petition is not liable to be dismissed without its admission. Accordingly, the petition is admitted to hearing. Let it be advertised in Indian Express and Veer Arjun as also in the Delhi Gazette for November 30, 1990. In case the company deposits in this court a sum of Rs. 5,75,000 within four weeks, the advertisement as directed above, will not issue. List the petition on November 30, 1990.
-
1990 (9) TMI 271 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... e existing and possible assets are insufficient to meet the existing liabilities (see Seth Mohanlal v. Grain Chambers Ltd. 1968 38 Comp. Cas. 543 AIR 1968 SC 772). While considering this ground, the court has also to consider the interest of the shareholders as well as of the creditors. No creditor is before the court. The majority of the shareholders are opposed to the winding up of the company. The petitioner and her group are prima facie debtors of the company. The said group unconditionally withdrew the petition alleging mismanagement and oppression. The assets of the company are not insufficient to meet the liabilities. In view of these facts and circumstances, it is not possible for this court to accept the contention that the substratum of the company has disappeared and that it is just and equitable to direct the winding up of the company. This contention is also rejected. For the reasons aforesaid, C.P. No. 52 of 1989 is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 2,500.
-
1990 (9) TMI 270 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Certain associations & persons receiving Foreign Contribution to give intimation to Central Government, Power of Central Government to prohibit receipt of Foreign Contribution, etc., in certain cases
-
1990 (9) TMI 269 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Oppression and mismanagement –Power of Tribunal on application under sections 397 and 398 ... ... ... ... ..... y had been claimed. Soon after that order, the present application was filed. It cannot be held, on the facts of the case, that the amendments are being sought with any mala fide intention. The delay, as already noticed earlier, has been explained and in any case the delay by itself cannot be the sole ground for refusing amendment. The amendments sought are necessary for effectively determining the controversy in the petition as the decision on the matters sought to be incorporated by amendment would vitally affect the company and its members. The law with regard to amendment is very liberal. The amendment will promote the ends of justice. Accordingly, C. A. No. 459 of 1984 is allowed. The applicant is directed to file amended petition within four weeks showing Hindustan Vegetable Oil Corporation Ltd. as respondent No. 16, as the prayer for impleading of the Commissioner of Payments has been declined. C. As. Nos. 166 of 1987 and 459 of 1984 are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1990 (9) TMI 268 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Directors - Power of ... ... ... ... ..... CLJ 640, a case under the Wakf Act wherein it was held that the Wakf Board was to take a decision for filing appeals. The secretary to the Wakf Board of his own could not take such a decision and file the appeal. The ratio of this decision cannot be applied to the case in hand. That was not a case relating to a company registered under the Companies Act. The present Corporation is a registered company and is governed by its own rules and regulations provided in the memorandum and articles of association, which have been discussed above. For the reasons recorded above, this revision petition is allowed. The order of the Additional District Judge is set aside and the appeal filed in the lower appellate court is held to be maintainable. The case is sent to the court of the Additional District Judge, Jagadhri, for deciding the appeal on merits according to law. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear there on October 12, 1990. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1990 (9) TMI 267 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... that follows is that the company petitions should be dismissed. I am supported in the view taken by me above by a Division Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court in Testeels Ltd. v. Radhaben Ranchhodlal Charitable Trust, AIR 1988 Guj. 213 1989 66 Comp. Cas. 555 wherein the learned judges held that under section 22 of the Act, the winding up proceedings already started against an industrial company can be dismissed and need not be kept in abeyance indefinitely without taking any further action in the matter. In the result, Company Petitions Nos. 44, 62 of 1987, 16, 23, 26, 34, 39, 43, 57 of 1988, 1, 2 of 1989 and 27 of 1990 are dismissed subject to the condition that in the event of the BIFR recording its opinion that it is just and equitable that SSSL should be wound up and forwarding its opinion to this court, the above company petitions would be revived and further proceedings would be continued. In the circumstances of the case, I direct each party to bear its own costs.
-
1990 (9) TMI 266 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Circumstances in which a company may be wound up, Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts
-
1990 (9) TMI 265 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Officer who is in default – Meaning of, Public deposits, Powers of court to grant relief in certain cases
-
1990 (9) TMI 264 - HIGH COURT PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... Straw Board to Mahalakshmi, failing which the company petition would be advertised in conformity with rule 24 of the Companies (Court) Rules. The admitting Bench while admitting the present appeal, vide order dated November 27, 1989, observed that if a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 is paid to the respondent, i.e., Mahalakshmi, then the ex parte stay order regarding the payment of money would continue, failing which the same would stand vacated. In pursuance of the stay order, the appellant company did pay Rs. 1,00,000 to the respondent Mahalakshmi. Under the circumstances, we direct that in case the appellant-company pays to the respondent the balance amount (i.e., Rs. 3,37,167.56 minus Rs. 1,00,000) with 18 interest from March 10, 1989, within one month from today then the company petition may not be advertised, otherwise the company petition would be advertised in the Tribune, the Punjabi Tribune and in the Punjab Government Gazette, one month after the date of the present judgment.
-
1990 (9) TMI 263 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Inherent powers of Court, Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... reed to the following condition The deposits, if any, made by the group of shareholders headed by Hari Dhan Singh shall be paid to the extent of 50 per cent. and it shall be accepted by the said group in full and final settlement. In the face of this, it appears difficult to accept the genuineness of the abovesaid loan transactions. If the petitioners had actually advanced the abovenoted amounts to the company by way of loan, it is difficult to appreciate as to why they should be accepting 50 per cent of their value in full and final settlement of their dues. I am, therefore, of the view that the petition, besides lacking bona fides, appears to have been filed for purposes of putting pressure on the company with a view to control its affairs and this clearly amounts to misuse of the process of the court. Thus, the petition is dismissed but with no order as to costs. However, the petitioners, if so advised, may seek their relief through a civil court of competent jurisdiction.
-
1990 (9) TMI 262 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts, Circumstances in which a company may be wound up
........
|
