|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 273 Records
-
1985 (7) TMI 114 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Refund - Interest payable thereon ... ... ... ... ..... of the Constitution cannot direct payment of interest. In my view, on the very principles found in Mamle Desai s case, the claim of the petitioner for payment of interest cannot be granted by me. 14. On the foregoing discussion, it follows that the claim of the petitioner except to the extent of interest has necessarily to be accepted by this Court. 15. In the light of my above discussion, I direct the Assistant Collector-respondent to implement the order made by the Collector on 19th July, 1984 (Annexure-A) and make payment of the amounts that are found due to the petitioner in terms of the said order with all such expedition as is possible in the circumstances of the case and in any event, within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. 16. Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. But, in the circumstances of the case, I direct the parties to bear their own costs. 17. Let this order he communicated to the respondent within 10 days from this day.
-
1985 (7) TMI 112 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Jute manufactures cess - Estoppel - Promissory estoppel ... ... ... ... ..... e Development Council. It is not an Act to augment the Government revenue as such. The purpose of this Act is quite different. Although in Section 3 of the Act, the cess that is being imposed has been described as an excise duty, the nature and purpose of this levy is quite different from the levy that has been made by the Central Excises and Salt Act. There cannot be any question of any promissory estoppel against passing of a legislation by the legislature. Moreover, in a case like this the Government cannot be compelled to issue a notification granting exemption to 100 export oriented units from the ambit of a special legislation which will also ensure to the benefit of such units. 27. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition fails and is dismissed. Interim order, if any, is vacated. 28. There will be no order as to costs. 29. On the oral prayer made on behalf of the petitioners let the operation of the order passed today be stayed for a period of two weeks from date.
-
1985 (7) TMI 111 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sugar - Partial exemption from excise duty to levy sugar ... ... ... ... ..... duty and the additional duty on the basis of such price. 6. The wording of the notification reproduced herein above makes it amply clear that the Government had classified sugar into two categories, one required by the Central Government and the other available for free sale in the open market through licensed dealers. It was only the sugar which was available to the Central Government which was partially exempted from excise duty under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The excise duty chargeable on free sale, therefore, would be 37-1/2 per cent and the excise duty which was available by the Central Government would be 25 per cent. This relief was obviously given to that quantity of sugar which was made available to be sold at control rate. In my view, such a classification is perfectly valid and is also reasonable. 7. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. Since the petitioners have already paid the correct duty under law, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1985 (7) TMI 110 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... citizen has a duty to pay all the taxes lawfully due from him, it is the legal obligation of the Government to charge as much amount of duty which is legally payable by the citizen. In the present case, since the trade notice was issued on 22nd June, 1967 the refund applications which were made on 26th August, 1967 were within the time prescribed by Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The petitioner could not have made the application till the position had been clarified. In any event Govt. should not stand on technicalities and refuse the legitimate claim of its citizens. 7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the petitioner firm would be entitled to the refund of Rs. 25,689.74 in respect of their claims submitted by them vide letter No. CE/87/67/1118 dated 26th August, 1967 recovered from the petitioner for the goods cleared by them for the period during March, 1966 to February, 1967 and 3rd May, 1967 to 8th May, 1967. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1985 (7) TMI 109 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Demand - Duty short levied and not levied - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... hat the goods cleared were not chargeable to excise duty. The Supreme Court in N.B. Sanjana s (supra) case has held that Rule 9(2) cannot apply to removal of goods with the knowledge and consent of the authorities. Rule 10 provides for recovery of duties not leviable or not paid or short levied or not paid in full or erroneously refunded. In order to recover duties which are erroneously refunded or not levied or short levied or not paid the notice has to be issued on the person chargeable with the duty within six months from the relevant date. In the present case, the goods were cleared on 7th January, 1966 and the notice was issued on 22nd May, 1969. Assuming that the notice was under Rule 10 even then since it was issued after a period of three years it was clearly beyond time. 5. In my view, therefore, the notice dated 22nd May, 1969 under Rule 9(2) of the Rules were illegal and therefore has to be quashed. The writ petition is allowed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1985 (7) TMI 108 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Refund claim - Countervailing duty ... ... ... ... ..... taken by the respondents on this aspect is as follows - Paras 5 and 6 of the petition are denied. It is denied that levying of contervailing duty is illegal as alleged. It is submitted that all electronic valves which may be used for the manufacture of electronic instruments, are chargeable to countervailing duty under Item 33 AA of Central Excise Tariff. The levy of the said duty by answering respondents, is perfect, legally valid and in accordance with the provision of Customs and Tariff Act. 7. As noticed above, the authorities have not gone into this question for deciding whether Section 27 of the Customs Act was applicable in the present case, in my view, it was mandatory for the Assistant Collector of Customs to have given a finding on the same. In the result, the petition is allowed and the matter remanded to the Assistant Collector of Customs, Refund Section, New Customs House, Bombay, respondent No. 4 herein for decision in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
-
1985 (7) TMI 107 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Silver articles - Evidence - Seizure - Interpretation of Statute - Words and phrases ... ... ... ... ..... g of a term in a legislation has to be interpretated in the context of the legislation. But an expression which is not defined in a statute cannot be given an artificial meaning on the basis of Statement of Objects and Reasons. The Statement of Objects and Reasons can certainly be looked at in order to determine the background and antecedent state of affairs which led to the legislation in question. But it cannot be resorted to in order to determine the true and correct meaning of words used in the statute. Much less can it be used to give an artificial meaning which the term does not ordinarily posses. 16. We are in respectful agreement with the detailed reasoning and conclusion arrived at by the learned trial Judge. In the premises the appeal is dismissed with costs. 17. Mr. Lokur applies for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. We do not find any substantial question of law of public importance which requires to be referred to the Supreme Court. 18. Application rejected.
-
1985 (7) TMI 106 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Valuation - Packing ... ... ... ... ..... rwarding charges, Laffa charges, miscellaneous handling charges which were realised from outstation parties by separate bills will form part of selling costs and cannot be included in the assessable value. Similarly, special packing provided at the request of outstation purchaser cannot also form part of the assessable value which has to be determined on the basis of the wholesale price charged at the time and place of removal of the goods from the factory gate. 12. The impugned order passed on 27th January, 1976 by the Respondent No. 2, therefore, must be quashed. The principles of law are quite clear. But since the assertion of facts made by the petitioner has not really been investigated, the case is remanded to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise to investigate into the facts and pass a fresh order in accordance with law bearing in mind the principles of law as stated hereinabove. 13. The Rule is disposed of finally as above. 14. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1985 (7) TMI 105 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Tobacco - Dutiability - Classification of goods - Interpretation of Taxing Statute ... ... ... ... ..... f, I shall be content if those who take pleasure from the use of this weed will contribute in some higher measure to the national Exchequer. plainly enough, neither he nor the statutory provisions under category II can possibly be intended to virtually kill the tobacco goose which lays golden eggs for the revenue. 28. To finally conclude, it is told that cut tobacco in the continuous manufacturing process of factory-made cigarettes is a product entirely different from the product known as smoking mixtures for pipes and cigarettes. Consequently, such cut tobacco in the process of manufacture is not leviable to excise duty under tariff item 4 category II clause 4 of Schedule I of the Central Excises and Salt Act. 29. Once it is held as above, it necessary follows that the demands sought to be raised against the petitioners are wholly unsustainable in law. Annexure 2 and the consequential Annexures 4, 5, 8 and 14 are, therefore, quashed. The writ petition is allowed with costs.
-
1985 (7) TMI 104 - HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SIMLA
Customs - Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... hable under clause (i) of sub-section (1) of Section 135 or under sub-section (2) of that section may be tried summarily by a Magistrate . 4. The perusal of the said section shows that an offence alleged against the petitioners-accused may be tried summarily. This being a provision contained in the special Act, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, the procedure prescribed in the code is not strictly applicable for the trial of the offence alleged against the petitioners. 5. For the foregoing reasons I am of the view that the case against the petitioners can be tried summarily and the procedure specified under Section 262 Cr. P.C. can be followed and in this way such like cases can be disposed of early. 6. The result of the above discussion is that the orders passed and the charges framed by the trial court against the petitioners are quashed and it is decided that the case be tried de novo summarily. The petitioner is accordingly disposed of.
-
1985 (7) TMI 103 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Stock taking-Tobacco - Remission of duty ... ... ... ... ..... duly qualified, to weigh the pros and cons and arrive at a reasonable percentage as being due to such natural causes. It may be mentioned that in one case the percentage of deficiency is as high as 55 . No attempt has been made to show that this high percentage is possible as a result of natural causes, apart from the statements that the deficiency is due to natural causes. 15. An argument was advanced before us that in the case of one A. Loganathan, the shortage at 25.7 and 33 was found. The Assistant Collector has accepted the explanation that the loss was a routine loss and had filed the proceedings. Now merely because in some other case a certain amount of loss has been accepted as routine loss, the appellant is not relieved of the burden of showing that in the circumstances that appeared in his case, the loss should be accepted as a routine loss. 16. In our view, there is no substance in this appeal. Consequently, the appeal fails and it is dismissed with costs Rs. 500.
-
1985 (7) TMI 102 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... ure exceeded 100 million matches. The two Notifications referred to above by us will clearly indicate that in so far as the excise duty was concerned, safety matches and Bengal lights were treated differently. The liability to pay at the rate of Rs. 4.30 if the clearance exceeds 100 million matches arises only on the basis of Notification No. 162/67. This notification can be effective only in respect of safety matches. The duty on Bengal lights is exclusively governed by Notification No. 45/61. The two notifications being entirely independent of each other, the authorities were clearly in error in clubbing the quantity of Bengal lights with the quantity of safety matches . There is, therefore, no error in the view taken by the learned Judge that the authorities were in error in clubbing the two different kinds of matches for the purpose of making an additional demand of excise duty. In view of this, the writ appeal must fail and is dismissed with costs counsel s fee Rs. 500.
-
1985 (7) TMI 101 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... e judgment of the Supreme Court, there cannot be any doubt that sanitary pads are drugs and, therefore, exemption notification will be attracted in the present case and the petitioners would be entitled to the benefit of the same. Common parlance test would not be attracted in this case. 7. In the result, the petitioner succeeds and the rule is made absolute by declaring that the petitioners are entitled to exemption under Notification No. 55/75-CE, dated 1-3-1975 as amended from time to time under Tariff Item 68 and accordingly the respondents are restrained from levying and collecting duty so long as that exemption is in force. 8. Rule is made absolute with costs. 9. The learned Counsel for the respondents prays for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 133 (1) of the Constitution of India. As the Division Bench has already granted leave in the case of Rainbow Surgical Co. (supra) leave is granted in this case also and the certificate as prayed for is granted.
-
1985 (7) TMI 100 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Writ jurisdiction - Refund of duty paid under protest - 'Malt' and 'Malt Extract' ... ... ... ... ..... hould be properly collected and taxes which are not due if realised by the State should be refunded. Such fiscal administration alone ensures the atmosphere of tax compliance. The Bombay High Court in Associated Bearing Company Ltd. v. Union of India and another, 1980 E.L.T. 415 has taken the same view. We are, therefore, in good company when we hold that petitioners are entitled to refund of excise duty paid under protest from March 1, 1978. 28. In the view that we have expressed, we quash the Tariff Advice No. 23/79 dated July 9, 1979 and the assessment proceedings culminating in the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Rohtak passed on October 7, 1980. As far as the order of the Collector, New Delhi is concerned, it remanded the matter back to the Assistant Collector, who will now dispose of the matter in accordance with the law laid down by us. The petition is accepted. The rule is made absolute. Petitioners would be entitled to costs. Counsel fee Rs. 2,000.
-
1985 (7) TMI 99 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA (FULL BENCH)
Intermediate products or captive consumption - Dutiability - Cess leviable on - Jute twine and yarn
-
1985 (7) TMI 98 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Valuation - Favoured buyer ... ... ... ... ..... hey must be treated as favoured buyers. As we have already pointed out, there is good justification for the manufacturer to dispose of large part of the stock only to one wholesaler and if in consideration of having lifted large part of the stock a lesser wholesale price is charged, the buyer does not merely on that account become a favoured buyer. The price which is a commercial price, must, therefore, be necessarily regarded as wholesale cash price for the purpose of Sec. 4. In our view, the order of the learned Judge dimissing the petition is also liable to be set aside. 17. We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the order of the learned Judge, allow the writ petition and hold that the appellant was entitled for the period 1-3-1969 to 14-11-1969 to Rs. 265, Rs. 308 and Rs. 348 determined as wholesale cash price in respect of the water heaters of the capacity of 25, 35 and 45 litres respectively. The respondents will pay the costs of this appeal. Counsel s fee Rs. 500.
-
1985 (7) TMI 97 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
'Silver bullion and Coins' - Interpretation ... ... ... ... ..... eaning of a term in a legislation has to be interpreted in the context of the legislation. But an expression which is not defined in a statute cannot be given an artificial meaning on the basis of Statement of Objects and Reasons. The Statement of Objects and Reasons can certainly be looked at in order to determine the background and antecedent state of affairs which led to the legislation in question. But it cannot be restored to in order to determine the true and correct meaning of words used in the statute. Much less can it be used to give an artificial meaning which the term does not ordinarily possess. 16. We are in respectful agreement with the detailed reasoning and conclusion arrived at by the learned trial Judge. In the premises the appeal is dismissed with costs. 17. Mr. Lokur applies for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. We do not find any substantial question of law of public importance which requires to be referred to the Supreme Court. Application rejected.
-
1985 (7) TMI 96 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Paints and pigments - Manufacture - Value of clearances - Classification of goods - Dutiability
-
1985 (7) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Proforma credit ... ... ... ... ..... die-cast-rotors. 8. The question that skill arises for my consideration is whether in the circumstances put forward by the petitioner, it was entitled to avail of the proforma credit facility. According to him, the provisions in sub-rule (7) should be applied to his case and he should be permitted to avail of the proforma credit facility in respect of the stampings supplied to Eltex Corporation, Coimbatore. This, however, should be subject to such conditions or terms which the Collector may impose on the petitioner as provided under Clause (ii) of sub-rule (7) of Rule 56A of the Rules. 9. In this view of the matter, the petitioner should succeed, and, consequently, I allow the writ petition, and quash the endorsement dated 18-7-1981 (Annexure-E), and remit the matter to the Asstt. Collector, Central Excise, East Dn., Bangalore-2nd respondent, to deal with the matter in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made in this order. Rule issued is made absolute.
-
1985 (7) TMI 94 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Stay - Dispensation of prior deposit pending appeal-Criterion ... ... ... ... ..... e proviso to Section 35F, the appellate authority may grant stay if the demand levied would cause undue hardship to the person appealing. The Collector should pass a speaking order taking into account this aspect of the matter. He may also consider whether any part of the demand is prima facie barred by time before passing appropriate orders. With these observation the writ petition is dismissed.
............
|
