|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 172 Records
-
1980 (8) TMI 92 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... worked by the petitioner having taken place, whatever be the reasons. The petitioners incurred liability for payment of duty at the higher rate till they produced a permit regarding reduction in the number of looms from the Textile Commissioner as required in terms of Notification No. 41/65. The petitioner s contention is that the term reduction has been wrongly interpreted by the lower authorities and that the term could only apply when the petitioner parted with the licensed looms by sale or gift etc., end not when they merely kept them in a dismantled state by them as clarified by the Textile Commissioner. Therefore in the circumstances of this case and the clarification by the Textile Commissioner, they should not be called upon to pay higher rate of duty. 3. Government accept the petitioner s contention which is eminently reasonable and therefore set aside the order-in-appeal. The revision application is accordingly allowed with consequential relief to the petitioners.
-
1980 (8) TMI 91 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... solid conductors. He did not deny that this concept of the Indian Specification was not built into item 27 of Central Excise Tariff. He also did not deny that the goods in question were manufactured from Aluminium ingots and the process of manufacture was a continuous one in which the Aluminium rods do come into existence at a particular stage. 4. Government observe that the scope of item 27(a)(ii) is wide enough to include wire bars, wire rods and castings. The goods would therefore, be assessable under item 27(a)(ii) and the fact that the end-use of the aluminium rods in question is as cables after insulation would not alter this position. The petitioners have not also been able to adduce any convincing reasons by way of references to technical works or trade practice etc. in support of their statement that the goods should not be classified as aluminium rods. Government accordingly see no reason for interfering with the Order-in-Appeal and reject the revision application.
-
1980 (8) TMI 90 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Machining and polishing of kohlu parts - Classification - Estoppel ... ... ... ... ..... Government accordingly direct that the Assistant Collector should examine the process of manufacture of the goods and decide the classification in the light of the above observation. 4. The petitioners have also contended that they had cleared the goods without payment of duty on the basis of some clarification given by the jurisdictional Supdt. and therefore no duty should be demanded because they had already cleared the goods without payment of duty on the basis of the clarification and would be put to heavy burden if they are asked to pay the duty at a later stage. This contention has no force. It is well-settled that there is no estoppel against a taxing statute. If legally the goods manufactured by the petitioners are leviable to duty, they can certainly be asked to pay the duty so leviable. The Appellate Collector has already held that the demands for the period beyond the limitation of one year would be time-barred. The revision application is disposed of accordingly.
-
1980 (8) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Edible oil imported in stainless steel containers - Prohibited goods - Review - Short levy and confiscation
-
1980 (8) TMI 88 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Valuation - Concept of distributor in Section 4 - Scope - Price List approved - Revocation of
-
1980 (8) TMI 87 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Fibre glass sleevings are not 'Textile' - Refund of duty paid under mistake of law ... ... ... ... ..... hold that the petitioner will be entitled to refund in W.P. 3962 and 3968 of 1977 but he will not be entitled to refund in W.P. 3963, 3961, 3965 and 3966 of 1977. The excess collection if any in W.P.3963, 3961, 3965 and 3966 of 1977 will be retained by the State for payment out to the ultimate customers as and when the claims are made and established by them. 14. In the result, the order of the first respondent in WP Nos. 3962, 3968, 3963, 3961, 3965 and 3966 of 1977 is quashed. In WP Nos. 3962 and 3968 of 1977 there will be a direction to the respondents to refund the excess customs duty collected. However, in W.P Nos. 3963, 3961, 3965 and 3966 of 1977 there will be no order for refund of excess customs duty collected since the same has been passed on to the consumers. The writ petitions are ordered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. 15. In view of the final orders passed on these writ petitions the bank guarantee given by the petitioner will stand discharged.
-
1980 (8) TMI 86 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... date of payment of duty Provided that if a bill of entry has been presented before the date of entry inwards of the vessel by which the goods are imported, the bill of entry shall be deemed to have been presented on the date of such entry inwards. (2) The provisions of this section shall not apply to baggage and goods imported by post. Therefore, the relevant date is the date of the presentation of the bill of entry, which, in this case is 13th March, 1979. Therefore, the first of the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner fails. 7. With reference to the second contention, I have already extracted the impugned notification. It nowhere purports to levy any duty. It merely exempts up to 87-1/2 . The logical corollary is that over and above this would be liable to duty. The power to grant exemption under Section 25 may be absolute or partial. In this case, the latter argument has also to be rejected. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed no costs.
-
1980 (8) TMI 85 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Valuation - When goods are sold through Central Marketing Division - Most of sales made through one agent - Selling expenses are excludible from the assessable value
-
1980 (8) TMI 84 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the respondent concerned commenced manufacture of cotton fabrics on the powerlooms for the first time on or after 1st April, 1961, irrespective whether he acquired the powerlooms before or after that date?
Held that:- Even though each of the respondents in the present case owned not more than four powerlooms, he would be liable to pay excise duty at the next higher rate under the third proviso to the notification dated 18th March, 1961, if he started manufacture of cotton fabrics on his powerlooms for the first time on or after 1st April, 1961, irrespective whether he acquired the powerlooms from the licensee before or after that date. We must, therefore, set aside the judgment of the High Court and send the matter back to the High Court so that the High Court may decide the writ petitions of the respondents in accordance with law and in the light of the observations contained in this judgment. Appeals allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 83 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Bitumenised Waterproof Paper - Dutiability ... ... ... ... ..... is done or colouring is done. We therefore hold that the respondents erred in invoking sub-item (4) of Tariff Item 17 in demanding the payment of excise duty. The principles in the above cases clearly apply to the facts of the case. As already stated, by treating the layers of kraft paper with bitumen, it cannot be said a new kind of paper is being brought into existence. I therefore hold that the respondents are not entitled to invoke entry 17(2) in demanding the payment of excise duty. It is not disputed that both the kraft paper and bitumen have already suffered excise duty. In view of the conclusion reached by me to levy excise duty over again on bitumenised waterproof paper will amount to double taxation. I therefore hold that the respondents are not entitled to collect excise duty on bitumenised waterproof paper under entry 17(2). In the circumstances, the notification dated 27-5-1976 is not valid and is quashed. The writ petitions are allowed, however, without costs.
-
1980 (8) TMI 82 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
False Statement, Offences ... ... ... ... ..... only those individuals who fail to carry out the duty cast by the specific provisions of the statute, or are otherwise responsible for the acts done. For the default of the Hindu undivided family, therefore, in payment of tax, the karta cannot be arrested and detained in prison. In view of what has been stated above, we must hold that as the petitioner cannot be attributed with the requisite mens rea, its further prosecution in the court of the learned Magistrate for an offence under s. 277 of the Act would tantamount to an abuse of the process of the court. The application must, therefore, succeed and the proceedings pending against the petitioner-company in case No. C449 of 1979, in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, is quashed. The rule is made absolute. Mr. Ghosal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue, orally prays for leave for the grant of a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court. The prayer is refused. R. K. SHARMA J.-I agree.
-
1980 (8) TMI 81 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ding dues, any business on money-lending was being carried on by the executors. The conclusion that emerges from the foregoing discussion is that the Tribunal was perfectly right in holding that during the accounting periods relevant for the two assessment years the assessee had not carried on any business activity and as a consequence the assessee was not entitled to any deduction by way of business expenditure or to carry forward the loss. We accordingly, answer question No. 1 referred in I.T.R. No. 156 of 1977 in the affirmative and question No. 2 in the negative, both the questions being answered against the assessee and in favour of the department. The question referred in I.T.R. No. 20 of 1978 is answered in the affirmative, that is, against the assessee and in favour of the department. The parties will bear their respective costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the court and the signature of the Registrar will be forwarded to the Tribunal as required by law.
-
1980 (8) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... that some partners acted contrary to the partnership deed and were found to have cheated the other partners did not mean that the partnership deed was altered. It would thus appear that the Tribunal was right in holding that the firm did not change its constitution within the meaning of s. 187 of the I.T. Act, 1961, as there was no such agreement between the partners. It would also follow that the firm would be entitled to the continuation of the registration under s. 184(7) of the I.T. Act, 1961, even if some of the partners made a secret profit. As a result of this discussion, it is not necessary to refer to the other cases cited by learned counsel for the assessee which are cases relating to the renewal of registration under s. 26A of the Act of 1922. We would, accordingly, answer the questions referred to us as follows. We would answer all the questions in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the department, but leave the parties to bear their own costs.
-
1980 (8) TMI 79 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Capital Employed, New Industrial Undertaking ... ... ... ... ..... returned to the boiler division after forging and mechanising, and yet it was not held to be a transfer of assets of the old business. As above noticed, the purpose of the section is apparently to provide tax incentives, to stimulate industry and the manufacture of articles, resulting in more employment and economic gain for the country. In order to see that this end is achieved it is necessary to guard against an assessee availing of the benefit of the exemption by the device of camouflaging or converting an old undertaking into a new one. Since the assessee before us is not guilty of this and the new undertaking fulfilled the required conditions, the assessee was entitled to claim the relief under s. 80J of the Act by reference to the capital employed in the new industrial undertaking at Faridabad. In the result the question is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The assessee will be entitled to costs. Counsel s fee is Rs. 250.
-
1980 (8) TMI 78 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... e Supreme Court has pointed out in State of Gujarat v. Shantilal Mangaldas, AIR 1969 SC 634, that the person whose property gets improved in value pays in the shape of betterment charges for all improvements which the town planning scheme entails. Under these circumstances, it is obvious that the expenditure in the shape of betterment charges paid under the town planning scheme for acquiring an enduring benefit are in the nature of capital expenditure and go to improve the value of the land hence, they would fall under s 48(ii) of the I.T. Act. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal was not right in holding that the betterment charges of Rs. 60,390 paid by the assessee to the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation could not be considered to be cost of improvement within the meaning of s. 48(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Question No. 2 is, therefore, answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. There will be no order as to costs of this reference.
-
1980 (8) TMI 77 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Firm, HUF, Interest Paid By Firm To Partner ... ... ... ... ..... e partner of the firm and irrespective of the character in, which he is the partner of the firm, whether any interest is paid to him as partner. If the creditor of the firm is not the partner but the HUF of which the partner is the karta, then a separate entity is the creditor of the firm and interest paid to that separate entity will not be governed by s. 40(b) and cannot be disallowed. In the instant case, there were two separate accounts, one in the individual name of Sajjandas Jwaladas and the other in the name of HUF of Shri Sajjandas Jwaladas. The amount of Rs. 7,777 was paid as interest to the HUF of Sajjandas Jwaladas. That being the case, it was paid to the creditor who was not a partner of the firm. Under these circumstances, the conclusion of the Tribunal was correct. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee.
-
1980 (8) TMI 76 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Pension, Salary ... ... ... ... ..... s chargeable to tax under the head Salary and, consequently, the meaning of the expression Salary given in s. 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, automatically applies to any amount of pension received by a person which is chargeable to tax under the head Salary . Therefore, it follows that any amount of pension received by the assessee from the U.N.O. falls within the description of the word salary used in ss. 14 and 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and, consequently, the immunity granted under s. 18 of art. V of the Schedule to the 1947 Act becomes applicable. The Tribunal had followed the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench B , reported in the case of Income-tax Officer, District VIII(5), New Delhi v. Dr. P. L. Narala 1975 Tax 38(6), 63, which had correctly interpreted the provisions. in our opinion, the view taken by the Tribunal is correct and accordingly, we answer the question referred in both these references in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee.
-
1980 (8) TMI 75 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... tely put to use in the two years under consideration, the amount of Rs. 12,600 spent in each of the two years under reference was for the purpose of the business of the assessee. It was spent wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of the assessee so that the assessee could ultimately have larger office premises where its business could be carried on in a better manner and more efficiently. Over a period of years the assessee was occupying a small office admeasuring 180 sq. ft. The assessee was now getting much larger space admeasuring 1,470 sq. ft. Hence, it cannot be said that this expenditure was not wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business of the assessee. In view of this conclusion it is obvious that the order of the Tribunal was correct. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee.
-
1980 (8) TMI 74 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Interest On Securities ... ... ... ... ..... parent that a link or nexus must be established between the monies borrowed for the purpose of investment in the securities and interest payable in respect of such borrowing. In other words, it must be shown that the monies were borrowed for the purpose of investment in securities and that the interest paid in respect of which deduction is claimed, is relatable to such borrowing. The Tribunal has found, as a matter of fact, that no such link or nexus is established. This is a pure finding of fact. Such finding of fact has not been specifically challenged on any of the permissible grounds. Under the circumstances, the conclusion is inevitable that the view of the Tribunal in regard to disallowance of deduction under s. 19(ii) is correct in law. In view of the foregoing discussion, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative, that is to say, in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The assessee shall pay the costs of this reference to the Commissioner.
-
1980 (8) TMI 73 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Income From Unexplained Sources ... ... ... ... ..... issioner-1st respondent who had jurisdiction under s. 264 of the I.T. Act should have remitted the matter to the ITO with a direction to ascertain from the bank whether such a deposit was withdrawn as contended by the assessee or with the direction that the ITO should call upon the petitioner to substantiate his assertion as to the source of the capital of Rs. 15,000. Neither of the respondents having approached the problem in this manner, it cannot be said that the 1st respondent-Commissioner exercised his revisional jurisdiction under s. 264 of the I.T. Act judicially and properly. Therefore, the impugned orders of the Commissioner and the ITO are set aside. Liberty is reserved to the ITO to call upon the petitioner to substantiate his assertion as to the source of Rs. 15,000 which he utilised as capital outlay in the year 1975, and to pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with law. Rule will accordingly issue and be made absolute. There will be no order as to costs.
|
