|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 123 Records
-
1979 (4) TMI 157 - CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS
... ...
... ... ..... st the appellant is an entry in the diary of the appellant, as it contains the name and address of Shri S.C. Jain and this fact has been sought to be projected to prove that the appellant knew the other two accused viz. Shri S.P. Jain and Shri S.C. Jain. In this connection, the Board observes that the appellant was an employee of M/s. Shaw Wallace and Co. and in the course of his duties, had to book orders on behalf of his Company and the mention of the name of Shri S.C. Jain in his diary, though may raise some doubts about his connections with the other two accused, cannot point out to a firm conclusion that the appellant was concerned with these contraband goods. 4. In view of the above, the board does not deem it necessary to go into various legal points raised in the appeal. Accordingly, the Board allows the appeal and sets aside the order of the Collector in so far as it relates to the imposition of personal penalty of ₹ 5,000 on this appellant is concerned.
-
1979 (4) TMI 156 - SUPREME COURT
Whether Parliament had the power to impose special duty on the import of country liquor in Delhi?
Held that:- if excise or countervailing duty could be levied on country liquor manufactured or imported into Delhi, albeit other conditions for the levy of such duty being fulfilled, Parliament would not lack competence to levy the same only because levy of such duty on alcoholic liquors for human consumption is within the competence of a State. Merely because Parliament could not levy countervailing duty on country liquor imported into Delhi because country liquor is not manufactured in Delhi, it does not exhaust the power of Parliament to levy some other duty on the import of liquor if it is otherwise constitutionally permissible.
The present levy under the amended provisions of the Act in its application to Delhi could certainly be said to be one enacted both with the object of regulating the trade or business in intoxicants and with a view to realising the goal fixed in Article 47 of the Constitution Therefore, one can look upon this measure both as a fiscal measure and the one safeguarding public health and even public morals because it is well recognised that liquor trade is instinct with injury to individual and community and has serious side-effects recognised everywhere in every age. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention that the retrospectivity of the Ordinance is illegal and invalid. Appeal dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 155 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... think that the conclusion of the Board in this respect is correct. In our view the contract relates solely to a particular work, namely, the construction of Durgapur Steel Works, and as such it is an indivisible contract. Question No. (3) is, therefore, answered in the negative and in favour of the applicant. Questions Nos. (4) and (5) are answered in the negative and in favour of the applicant. Questions Nos. (6), (7) and (8) are answered in the negative and in favour of the applicant. As to question No. (9) it appears to us that the finding of the Board which is sought to be impugned is not at all clear. The impugned finding is tentative and vague and no final conclusion is reached. In that view of the matter this question does not call for any answer. We answer questions Nos. (10), (11) and (12) in the negative and in favour of the applicant. The reference is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. BANERJI, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1979 (4) TMI 154 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... , the Supreme Court held that the assessee had to deposit the tax admitted by him to be due in his returns or before the assessing authority. In this view of the matter, it is not possible to accept the contention that the assessee had to deposit not only the tax that is admitted by him in his returns, but also any interest that may have fallen due thereon. My attention was drawn to two decisions of this Court, Kanpur Vanaspati Stores, Kanpur v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh 1969 23 S.T.C. 62 (All.). , and Ramnath Dubey v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh 1972 29 S.T.C. 130. In none of those cases, it has been held that not only the tax admitted by the assessee in his returns has to be deposited, but also the interest that may have fallen due thereon, on account of failure to deposit the tax within time. The contention raised is not supported by the language of section 9(1)(a) and cannot be accepted. The revision fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 153 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ing transmissions of sound. I am unable to accept this contention. Radio is an instrument for receiving transmitted sound and then it amplifies it so that it can be heard. A transistor radio does the same work and the only difference is that instead of using electric valves for receiving transmissions, transistors are utilised. A mere change in the mechanism of the transistor radio, in my view, will not make the article different from a radio. Thus, transistor radios sold by the assessee were liable to be taxed under the notification dated 1st June, 1963. The revision is, accordingly, partly allowed. It is held that the record players, records and transistor radios sold by the assessee were liable to be taxed under the notification dated 1st June, 1963, but not record changers. A copy of this judgment will be sent to the revising authority under section 11(8) of the Act. In view of the partial success and failure, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition partly allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 152 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s. Raincoats may also be permissible to be purchased at the concessional rate of tax, as may be necessary for the use of linesmen working on the transmission lines, during the rainy season and in the extreme winter. Similarly, the battery cells may also be permitted to be purchased by the Electricity Board on C forms, but only to the extent that they are necessary to be used by the linesmen to work on transmission lines during night. The Electricity Board may use C forms for the purposes of buying tyres, tubes, battery cells, raincoats and soaps to the limited extent indicated above. We also hold that the Electricity Board rightly used the C forms for the purchase of the aforesaid goods to the extent indicated above, while C forms could not be made use of for the purchase of iron safes or battery cells as well as of soaps, varnishes and paints for other purposes except those referred to above. The two reference cases are answered accordingly. References answered accordingly.
-
1979 (4) TMI 151 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e had filed the return under rule 18 as a result of which it was not possible to exercise the option available under section 7. This decision also does not in any manner support the contention of the revenue in the present case. What was contemplated by the said observation was that the case in Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Coimbatore v. Amirtham Ghee Stores 1978 41 S.T.C. 259. was a case where a dealer rendered himself ineligible for exercising the option originally under section 7 by filing his return under rule 18. That is not the position here. In fact, it has been pointed out in the second of the two decisions at page 268 that a provision like this intended to help small traders should not be strictly construed . On the facts of this case, we are satisfied that the Tribunal has acted properly in giving the benefit of the provisions of section 7 to the assessee in the present case. The revision fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 150 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ver of purchases is the aggregate of the purchase price paid by the dealer. In the present case, there is no finding that the assessee paid the purchase price to the principals directly. On the contrary, the findings suggest that the transactions were finalised by the kachcha arhatia who not only collected the actual price of the commodity but along with it his commission at the rate of one and a half per cent. This being so, as the deal was finalised through the kachcha arhatia, and the payment made by the purchaser to the kachcha arhatia, the purchase price paid by the assessee for foodgrains and oilseeds was the actual price of the foodgrains, coupled with the commission paid for the purchase. In the circumstances, the commission paid to the kachcha arhatia had to be included in the turnover of purchases. The reference, which is being treated as a revision in view of the amendment in the law, fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 149 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ication for exemption certificate under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 4 or to an order refusing an application under section 30 or to an order imposing a penalty under ......section 15-A.......... or to an assessment made under section 7, 7-A, 7-B, 18 or 21, may within 30 days from the date of service of the copy of the order or notice of assessment, as the case may be, appeal to such authority as may be prescribed. Recovery certificates are issued under section 8(8) of the Act. Assuming for the purposes of the present case that the endorsement on the order sheet is an order passed by the Sales Tax Officer, but as it is one which has been made under section 8(8), which is not appealable, the appeal filed by the assessee was incompetent, and was rightly dismissed. The view taken by the revising authority is incorrect, and cannot be upheld. The revision is allowed. As none has appeared on behalf of the assessee, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 148 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nvalid. Section 9(2) of the amending Act does not possibly cure this defect. It was also contended that the revising authority could not set aside the penalty order in view of section 9(2). Section 9(2) of the Act does not take away the right of appeal or revision, which an assessee has under the general sales tax law of the State. It thus did not impose any restriction on the jurisdiction of the appellate and revisional powers in respect of the penalty orders passed by the Sales Tax Officer. The appellate and the revising authorities could on an appeal or revision go into the validity of the penalty order, and examine as to whether it was justified under the penalty provisions of the State law and, in the event of their being unwarranted, they could in exercise of the appellate and revisional powers set them aside. This is precisely what the revising authority has done in the case. The revision fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 147 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... discretion to entertain or not to entertain the writ petition in the absence of the petitioner availing himself of the alternative remedy should be exercised at the time of admitting the petition. After admission the petition should be decided on merits and not on the preliminary ground. Lastly, the period of limitation for the alternative remedy having now expired, it would be unjust for this Court to dismiss the writ petitions on the preliminary ground. We, therefore, decide these writ petitions on merits. For the reasons stated above, we hold that the orders passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal were without jurisdiction and hence they are set aside. The orders of the sales tax authorities, which had been reversed by the Tribunal and which had held that the transfer of goods in a hire-purchase contract amounted to a sale within the meaning of section 2(g) of the Act, are restored. The parties are to bear their own costs in all the cases disposed of above. Ordered accordingly.
-
1979 (4) TMI 146 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... from the category of painting material is not correct as the words used in the notification are all painter s materials , and similar wide phraseology is used in the Hindi version. This item includes all articles which are used by a painter for painting. There is no evidence on the record that chandras is used for purposes other than painting. The findings given indicate that it is used for imparting shining finishes to painted objects. It is as such a material used by the painters for giving a finishing touch to the painted articles in order to enhance its brilliance. This being so, it would fall within the category of all painter s materials , and will be taxable as such. The revision is allowed, and the revising authority is directed to redetermine tax on the turnover of chandras. A copy of this order will be sent to the revising authority under section 11(8) of the Act. As none has appeared on behalf of the assessee, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 145 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... inted out above, the amount demanded in one case from the assessee is Rs. 90.72, while in the other case it is Rs. 258.90 only. The function of this Court under section 15 of the Act is to lay down or clarify the correct legal position in a reference case, but as the law has already been laid down in this matter in the Indian Hume Pipe Co. s case I.L.R. 1968 18 Raj. 188., we do not think it necessary to call for a reference in any of these two matters where the amount involved is altogether insignificant. In the result, although we disapprove of the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and the Board of Revenue in these two matters as they do not represent the correct legal position, yet we do not consider it proper and necessary to call for references from the Board of Revenue under section 15 of the Act. The reference applications are accordingly dismissed, in the light of the observations made above. The parties are left to bear their own costs. Applications dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 144 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y the assessee were laces within the meaning of Notification No. ST3612/X-900(21)-69 dated 1st July, 1969. The meaning ascribed to the word lace in the Random House Dictionary of the English Language is a netlike ornamental fabric of threads, a cord or string for holding or drawing together two flaps, being passed through holes in their edges, ornamental cord or braid, a small amount of liquor added to food or drink . The label used by the assessee does not answer the description of any of the commodities referred to. The first, second and third meanings given to the word lace in the dictionary are such as are given to the word lace in common parlance. Labels are not called laces in common parlance. The view taken by the revising authority cannot be sustained. The revision is allowed. A copy of this order will be sent to the revising authority under section 11(8) of the Act. As none has appeared on behalf of the assessee there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 143 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ioner cancelled the assessment and directed the Sales Tax Officer to make a fresh assessment after taking into consideration the transactions and turnover disclosed on search by the Intelligence Officer. 2.. The power exercised by the revisional authority was strictly within the scope of section 35 of the Act. No question of trenching upon the assessment of escaped turnover arises in this tax revision. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in affirming the order of the Deputy Commissioner and sustaining his power. We dismiss this tax revision with no order as to costs. We have heard the counsel. These cases were posted for being spoken to today, as the learned Government Pleader submitted that, in the light of the reasoning and the conclusion in T.R.C. No. 12 of 1978, the other two tax revision cases preferred by the State have to be allowed. This submission is correct. We allow T.R.C. Nos. 27 and 75 of 1978 and set aside the orders of the Tribunal. Ordered accordingly.
-
1979 (4) TMI 142 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... and kheel were different forms of rice, one being made by flattening rice and the other by parching it. Lal is not kheel but is made by the same process and is puffed rice obtained by parching. The view taken is in consonance with the Supreme Court in the case of Alladi Venkateswarlu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh 1978 41 S.T.C. 394 (S.C.) A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 945. , wherein it has been held that the word rice is wide enough to include parched and flattened rice. The revising authority took the correct view. The revision fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 141 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the assessment order for 1967-68 for want of notice? As there was difference of opinion between two Division Benches of this Court, and as the dealer was entitled to notice before an ex parte assessment was made under section 7(3) of the Act, the matter was referred to the Full Bench. The Full Bench by its order dated 27th April, 1979, has held that where best judgment assessment is made under section 7(3), in case no return is filed by the dealer, the dealer is entitled to a notice, and the assessment order passed without notice should be set aside but cannot be annulled. The reference, which is being treated as a revision, is allowed and the order of the revising authority annulling the assessment is set aside. The revising authority is directed to decide the revision in accordance with the law as laid down by the Full Bench. A copy of this judgment will be sent to the revising authority under section 11(8) of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 140 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e turnover related to the year 1974-75, but the declarations related to the period of 1975-76. 12.. As we have already indicated, the petitioner s stand is that the entire turnover has been duly returned. That is a matter which can only be appropriately examined by the Sales Tax Officer and we would express no view. For the reasons we have indicated above, it is appropriate that the present demands in both the cases should be vacated and the Sales Tax Officer should be directed to reframe the assessments after giving full opportunity to the petitioner to represent its case and support the stand taken by it. In doing so, the Sales Tax Officer would act in accordance with law and the guideline indicated in relation to the question as to when the escalated claim becomes sale price as also in relation to acceptance of the declaration forms. Both the writ applications are allowed to the extent indicated above. We make no order for costs. MOHANTI, J.-I agree. Applications allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 139 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... evising authority later on. Thus, both in a proceeding under section 35, and in a proceeding under section 11 of the Act, the law on the point Is declared, effect to which is given later on. It is undoubtedly true that in a reference answered by the High Court, the law declared operates also for that assessment year, but if the law declared is of a general nature, then it becomes binding on the sales tax authorities for the other years also. Thus, in substance, a proceeding under section 35 is really a provision in the nature of a reference made by the assessee to the Commissioner for his opinion on the questions envisaged by section 35(2) of the Act. This being so, the Commissioner of Sales Tax was competent to decide the application on merits, and he erred in refusing to entertain it on the ground that the question related to liability under the Central Sales Tax Act. The appeal is accordingly allowed with cost to the assessee, which is assessed at Rs. 200. Appeal allowed.
-
1979 (4) TMI 138 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... able, in the decision of Agra Electric Supply Co. Ltd. s case (see p. 337 infra) applies to the present case. In the result, I am making the following order There will be an order in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (c ). The Registrar, Original Side, of this court shall transmit without delay a certified copy of this order to the Subordinate Judge s Court at Sasaram where the said Title Suit No. 164, of 1978 (District Board, Rohtas v. Arrah Sasaram Light Railway Co. Ltd.) is pending and the said Subordinate Judge s Court, Sasaram, shall on receipt of the said order transmit the records of the said suit and all proceedings thereunder to this court. The Registrar, Original Side, of this court and the Registrar, Subordinate Judge s Court at Sasaram and all parties to act on a signed copy of the minute. Costs of this application will be costs in the suit. The suit will appear in the list three weeks hence for direction. Stay asked for is refused. Order to be drawn up expeditiously.
........
|
