|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 168 Records
-
1985 (11) TMI 68 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Natural justice - Speaking order - Short landing - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... e Deputy Collector is directed to give reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and especially if the petitioner makes a fresh application for witness summons to the B.P.T. Officer who made the outturn report he shall issue the witness summons, to the concerned officer. It is needless to say that the Deputy Collector will also consider the evidence that will be adduced by the parties at the hearing and will pass the appropriate orders in accordance with law by giving findings as expected from a quasijudicial tribunal. 3. In the result, the petition succeeds. The impugned order dated June 25,1984 is quashed and set aside and the rule is made absolute in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. The matter is remanded back to the Deputy Collector of Customs for disposal in the light of the observations made hereinabove. There shall be no ordet as to costs. The Deputy Collector will dispose of the proceedings as expeditiously as possible and preferably before the end of March, 1986.
-
1985 (11) TMI 67 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYD.
Penalty under Central Excise Rules, 1944 ... ... ... ... ..... son singing the declaration on behalf of the company. There is no conflict or overlapping between the rules and they operate in different spheres. Rule 173-Q is concerned with the levy of penalty and Rule 221 facilitates the collection of such penalty from the Company as well the person signing the declaration on behalf of the company. The expression employed in Rule 221(2) is payment only as distinct from liability under Rule 173-Q, Rule 221 is only supplementary to Rule 173-Q and it does not have an independent existence or status. The person signing declaration in conformity with Rule 221 is making himself liable for payment of duties and this can be considered in the nature of surety or joint and several liability. The order of the appellate authority in the circumstances should be considered as making the petitioner liable for payment of penalty. 7. In the result the order of the learned single Judge is confirmed. Writ Appeal dismissed. No costs. Advocate fee Rs. 150/-.
-
1985 (11) TMI 66 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Stay of recovery during statutory period given for filing appeal ... ... ... ... ..... etitioner has three months time to file an appeal under Section 35-B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The petitioner has yet to file an appeal. He may do so within the time prescribed. We have perused the Circular No. 29 of 1982 which is contained in C.E. and C. Bulletin No. 23, Volume 2 which shows that the recovery proceedings are not to be resorted to for the period of four months from the date of the receipt of the communication. Since the communication of the order took place on the 11th October, 1985 the period of four months runs up to 11th February, 1985. We have no doubt that the respondent will abide by the above circular. The petitioner can pray for stay before the appellate authority and it is not necessary for this court to pass any such order on this writ petition. We have no doubt that the respondent will take up the stay application within a reasonable period of time when the same if filed. 2. With these observations this writ petition is dismissed.
-
1985 (11) TMI 65 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Writ Jurisdiction - Reappraisal of evidence ... ... ... ... ..... of the case, which can be gone into in the appeal rather than in this petition. Similarly the question whether any prejudice was caused by not producing the branch manager for cross-examination would depend on what prayer was made for the same and whether his presence was necessary for cross-examination. This too will depend on other evidence and the facts of the case. All this involves sifting of evidence and examination of the materials on the record. We feel that this can be raised before the appellate authority. As regards the appreciation of evidence, this court will not undertake to reappraise evidence in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. This can be done in greater detail by the appellate authority. 3. We are therefore, of the opinion that the writ petition must be rejected on the ground that the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. This writ petition is accordingly rejected.
-
1985 (11) TMI 64 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Valuation - Cement ... ... ... ... ..... section (1) thereof, or in other words, the amendment made in Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. It is, therefore, obvious that the provisions contained in Section 47 of the Finance Act, 1982, on which reliance is placed by the respondents, is not available in the present case on the facts which are not in controversy. The respondents contention is, therefore, rejected. 7. Consequently, both these petitions are allowed with costs. The show cause notices, Annexure-A, dated 15th July, 1983, issued by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Raipur, and Annexure-B, dated 5th August, 1983, issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise, Raipur, in Misc. Petition No. 2151 of 1983, and Annexure-A, dated 14th September, 1983, issued by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Raipur, in Misc. Petition No. 2449 of 1983 are quashed. Counsel s fee Rs. 2001/-, if certified, in each case. The security amount, if any, be refunded to the petitioners in each case.
-
1985 (11) TMI 63 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Valuation - Re-assessment - Writ jurisdiction - Alternative remedy ... ... ... ... ..... , we are of the opinion that the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Collector, respondent No. 2, in both these petitions must be quashed and the Assistant Collector should be directed to decide these matters afresh. 7. Consequently, both these petitions are allowed. The impugned orders, i.e., Exh. E dated 30th September, 1981 and Exh. E dated 5th October, 1981 in Misc. Petition No. 310 of 1982 and Exh. A dated 14th February, 1982 in Misc. Petition No. 311 of 1982 are quashed. The Assistant Collector, respondent No. 2, shall decide these matters afresh in accordance with law with advertance to the above observations after notice to the petitioner-company. The bank guarantees furnished to the tune of Rs. 1,96,285 in Misc. Petition No. 310 of 1982 and Rs. 51,725 in Misc. Petition No. 311 of 1982 shall be returned to the petitioner-Company. There will be no order as to costs of these petitions. The security amount, if any, be refunded to the petitioner-company in each case.
-
1985 (11) TMI 62 - HIGH COURT AT ALLAHABAD
Search and seizure ... ... ... ... ..... was possible that the goods may be released at Allahabad and the same may not be sent back to Calcutta. Mr. Dhawan .informs us on instructions from the respondents No. 1 and 2 that the adjudication proceedings will take place at Allahabad and the seized goods shall not be sent to Calcutta. In view of the above statement we feel that it will be proper to dispose of this writ petition with certain observations only. 3. The seized goods and the truck may be released by the respondents on the petitioner s executing a bond in proper form and on furnishing such security that the Collector may require. Reference may be made to Para 43 of Adjudication Manual issued by the Directorate of Customs and Central Excise, New Delhi. We would only expect that the above may be done expeditiously. With these observations the writ petition is dismissed. 4. A certified copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within forty-eight hours.
-
1985 (11) TMI 61 - HIGH COURT AT PATNA
Excise - Recovery ... ... ... ... ..... nka and Sriram Banka, the original certificate debtors, whether their heirs could be substituted in their place and whether the certificate could be realised from them. The Bihar Public Demand Recovery Act clearly provides for executing the certificate against the heirs of the certificate debtor. My learned Brother has discussed this aspect of the matter with which I am in full agreement. Once the certificate has been transmitted, the satisfaction of the certificate in this State has to be carried out in terms of the Bihar Act. There can therefore, be no serious objection to the revenue authorities proceeding against the petitioners. The reliance placed upon the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890 is clearly misplaced. The provisions of that Act do not nullify the provisions of the Bihar Act. The provisions of the Central Act must be read as supplementing the State Act not supplanting them. The application has, therefore, been rightly dismissed by my learned Brother.
-
1985 (11) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Refund - Demand set aside - Effect ... ... ... ... ..... cation for granting this prayer. The show cause notice has been issued, which has to be replied to and decided in accordance with law. It goes without saying that even in this proceeding if the petitioner asks for a hearing, the petitioner must be afforded an opportunity to do so. We would, therefore, observe that the proceedings upon the show cause notice may continue alongwith the proceedings that are pending upon remand before respondent no. 1 upon remand from the Collector (Appeals). 8. In view of the above, the writ petition is partly allowed. A direction is issued to the respondent no. 1 to forthwith refund the sum of Rs. 3,83,836.80 by crediting the same in the personal ledger account of the petitioner with the respondents. The reliefs for quashing of the show cause notice dated 14-10-1985 and restraining the respondents from proceedings upon that notice are both refused. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case the parties are left to bear their own costs.
-
1985 (11) TMI 59 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Valuation - Demand ... ... ... ... ..... e the one before us falls more properly within the residuary class of unforeseen cases. We think that, from the provisions of Section 4 of the Act read with Rule 10A, an implied power to carry out or complete an assessment, not specifically provided for by the rules, can be inferred. No writs of prohibition or mandamus were, therefore, called for in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, action taken to levy and recover duty for the years in question, is valid in law and is not barred by limitation. 11. The demand made is for the period between 1-11-1969 to 14-5-1976. The project report relied upon by the department refers to the period 1971 to 1975. It is not clear on which day the said project report was filed by the petitioner. Therefore, the first respondent shall ascertain the actual date on which the said report was filed and give the necessary relief. The demand for the years 1969 and 1970 is, therefore, set aside. In the result the writ petition is partly allowed.
-
1985 (11) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Timber - Sawn Timber - Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... conclusions reached by the Supreme Court in Titaghur Paper Mills case, which arose under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, are, in my opinion, applicable to these cases arising under the Central Excises Act. The observations made by the Supreme Court and the guidelines given in the said judgment as regards the correct understanding and the meaning of timber in its diverse aspects are appropriately pressed by the petitioners for my acceptance. 52. The subject-matter of controversy both that arose in the appeals before the Supreme Court in Titaghur Paper Mills case, and in these cases, is substantially the same, namely, whether timber includes, sawn/sized timber, etc, 53. In the light of the Supreme Court decision, the contentions put forward by the petitioners should prevail. 54. In the result, the impugned show cause notices issued is each of the writ petitions are liable to be quashed. It is, therefore, ordered accordingly and the Rule issued in each of the cases is made absolute.
-
1985 (11) TMI 57 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Precedent - Appellate order binding effect for subsequent period ... ... ... ... ..... or in issuing the impugned notices cannot be held to be contrary of law. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length I am of the view that it would be fair to both the sides if the Assistant Collector is restrained from levying the excise duty on the cost of the drums till the final disposal of the appeal against the order of the Collector, Annexure P. 3, by the Appellate Tribunal. There is no gainsaying that the departmental authorities would be as much bound by the said order of the Tribunal as the petitioner would be. This, however, does not affect the right of the Assistant Collector to keep on issuing demands to the petitioner till the final disposal of the above noted appeal. To clarify the matter it may be stated here that what the Assistant Collector would not do till the decision of the appeal by the Tribunal against the order Annexure P. 3 is that no duty would actually be levied and recovered from the petitioner. I pass no order as to costs.
-
1985 (11) TMI 56 - SUPREME COURT
Whether ammonia paper and ferro paper can be described as "paper other than hand made paper" for the purposes of the notification No. ST-3124/X-1012(4)-1965 dated July 1, 1966 issued under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948?
Held that:- We agree with the High Court that ammonia paper and ferro paper does not fall within the entry "paper other than hand made paper" in Notification No. ST-3124/X-10l2(4)-l965, dated July 1, 1966. Appeal dismissed.
-
1985 (11) TMI 55 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the medicinal preparation is capable of being consumed as ordinary alcoholic beverage or not and not whether it is in semi-solid or liquid form?
Whether in determining the value of the medicinal preparations for the purpose of levying excise duty thereon the authorities erred in taking the wholesale price of the said preparations and not the price at which these preparations were supplied by the said firm to their chief distributor Messrs M.B. Bhavsar & Sons?
Held that:- These preparations were patent or proprietary medicines which contained alcohol and it was undisputed that such preparations were not capable of being consumed as ordinary alcoholic beverages. The High Court was, therefore, right in holding that these medicinal preparations were dutiable under Item 1.
Both these firms had their offices in the same premises and under the partnership agreement the sons of the original First Appellant and the other two Appellants were to share only in the profits of Messrs M.B. Bhavsar & Sons but not to be liable for any losses. These two firms, therefore, cannot be said to be at arm's length or independent parties and the prices at which the medicinal preparations were supplied by Bhavsar Chemical Works to Messrs M.B. Bhavsar & Sons cannot be taken to be the real value of the said preparations. The High Court was, therefore, right in rejecting this contention also. Appeal dismissed.
-
1985 (11) TMI 54 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Diversion By Overriding Title, Maintainence To Family Member By Ex-ruler, Privy Purse ... ... ... ... ..... e reasons given in Arvind Singh s case and after considering the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act and the authorities mentioned in the said decision, we are of the opinion that the receipts of Rs. 60,000 each for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 and of Rs. 84,000 and Rs. 50,000 relating to the assessment years 1970-71 and, 1971-72, respectively, do not constitute the assessee s income liable to be taxed. Mr. B. R. Arora, learned counsel for the Revenue, did not show us any decision after the date of August 22, 1985, either of this court or of the Supreme Court, taking a contrary view from the one taken in Arvind Singh s case . We, therefore, answer the question referred for the opinion of this court in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We leave the parties to bear their own costs of this reference. Let the Tribunal be informed of this order in accordance with section 260(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (No. XLIII of 1961).
-
1985 (11) TMI 53 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Rectification ... ... ... ... ..... ce. His Lordship, therefore, held that the demand notice, in so far as demanding of interest was concerned, was without jurisdiction. There can be no exception to the decision of B. C. Basak J. in the case of Monohar Gidwany 1983 139 ITR 498. The present case before us is different. This is not a case of demand of interest without any legal procedure. In that view of the matter, this case also cannot be of any assistance to the assessee. Having given our best consideration to the submissions urged before us, we are of the view that the Tribunal was not correct in holding that there was no mistake apparent on the record in the original order which could be rectified under section 154 of the Act. Reference is, therefore, answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There will, however, be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Assistant Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in terms of section 260 of the Act.
-
1985 (11) TMI 52 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Agricultural Income, Expenditure Incurred, Income Tax, Wholly And Exclusively ... ... ... ... ..... ield cannot be considered to be expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of deriving the agricultural income in the limited sense in which that expression is understood by the Supreme Court. The expenditure may have been warranted by law and, therefore, expended for the purpose of the business, but to come within section 5(j), the assessee has to show further that it was proximately connected with the earning of the profit. Expenditure on the construction of a football ground is not of such a character. The claim under section 5(j) was, in our view, rightly disallowed by the Tribunal. Accordingly question No. I is answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. We direct the parties to bear their respective costs in these tax referred cases. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar shall be forwarded to the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode.
-
1985 (11) TMI 51 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nts for the payment of the licence fees which have been refunded to the appellants by the Excise Department . In the light of what is stated above, we are of the opinion that the question on whom the onus lies to show that the refund in question had been allowed as a deduction in the earlier years, does not arise at all. As already stated, the investigation envisaged under section 41(1) is only the verification of the orders of assessment for the earlier years in which the assessee had been granted the deduction or allowance. The assessing authority, therefore, can even now verify the orders of assessment for the said years and determine the profit liable to be taxed under section 41. We are, therefore, of the view that the questions aforesaid do not require to be answered and accordingly we decline to answer them. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar shall be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1985 (11) TMI 50 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Search And Seizure ... ... ... ... ..... ffirmed . Neither of the two has been struck off and there is every possibility of the accused not being examined on oath. There is further no other record to show that an oath was administered to the accused by the complainant. Therefore, it is doubtful whether the impugned statement was at all given by the accused on oath. I have also perused her statement recorded on November 8, 1983, under section 131 of the Act where it is mentioned that the oath was administered . It must be remembered that in the present case, the accused is being prosecuted for giving a false statement on oath. Hence, it is necessary to prove beyond doubt that the statement was given on oath. On the basis of the record as it stands, it is very difficult for me to draw an inference that the accused has made a false statement on oath. I am, therefore, of the opinion that no prima facie case has been made out against the accused. Hence, the criminal revision application fails and the rule is discharged.
-
1985 (11) TMI 49 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Deduction, Disallowance, Firm Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... nt for the purpose of this clause. Explanation 3.-Where an individual is a partner in a firm otherwise than as partner in a representative capacity, interest paid by the firm to such individual shall not be taken into account for the purposes of this clause, if such interest is received by him on behalf, or for the benefit, of any other person. Though this Explanation is not applicable to the present case as it was brought into effect from April 1, 1985, still the Explanation so added points out the effect of interest paid in such cases. That apart, it was not disputed that there is a circular issued by the Department, which is binding on the Department. Thus, we are of opinion that the authority cited by the learned counsel for the Revenue being distinguishable does not support the contention of the Revenue on the facts and circumstances of the case. In the result, this reference is answered in the favour of the assessee and against the Department with no order as to costs.
....
|
