|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 194 Records
-
1988 (5) TMI 358 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... view of categorical findings of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) that there is no material on record to show that the assessee had concealed its production or sales and that the department has not been able to adduce evidence from which any inference relating to suppression or concealment of sales can be inferred, no further investigation was required in the matter by the assessing authority. It is also pertinent to mention that the said findings have not been challenged by the Revenue inasmuch no appeal was preferred by the Revenue before the Tribunal. It was the assessee who went in appeal before the Tribunal, and the findings recorded by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) themselves did not warrant any remand and consequently the Tribunal was wholly justified in accepting the disclosed turnover of the assessee under the U.P. as well as Central. In the result the revisions fail and are accordingly rejected. However, there will be no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (5) TMI 357 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ne into the various issues arising from section 6 of the aforesaid Act but as the issues may have some relation with the facts also, so, it would be proper that an opportunity may be afforded to the parties to bring to the notice of the Tribunal all necessary facts for determining the issues, which they want to agitate in the light of the provision of section 6. Thus, it would be proper that the matter may be sent back to the Tribunal to examine the above questions. In the result, this revision is allowed, the order of the Tribunal is set aside and the matter will go back to the Tribunal with the direction that the Tribunal shall decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties on the aforesaid questions. It would be open to the parties to produce relevant material and evidence for arriving at appropriate conclusions on the legal issues, which may be involved. The parties shall bear their own costs. Petition allowed.
-
1988 (5) TMI 356 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sidered in that light. It is obvious that the actual nature of transactions and the circumstances in which these charges were incurred by the dealer as well as the basis on which exclusion of that amount from the sale price was claimed have to be considered for deciding whether the same can be included within the definition of sale price under the Act and consequently can form the taxable turnover of the dealer. This not having been done by the Tribunal, the same has to be considered and decided afresh with advertence to the above observations in the light of the decisions on this point. It is only to this extent that the Tribunal s order is set aside requiring a fresh decision by the Tribunal on this point. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed only to the extent indicated above and the Tribunal is directed to decide the question regarding charges relating to hundis, stamps, banking and dharmada, etc., afresh in accordance with law. No costs. Petition partly allowed.
-
1988 (5) TMI 355 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t to record. The impugned orders of assessment have not been passed keeping the aforesaid position of law in mind and facts have not been brought to the records of assessments. We, therefore, set aside the orders of assessment in each case and direct the assessing officer to reassess by giving specific finding supported by reasons. It is not open to the statutory authorities not to entertain the objection relating to jurisdiction like interState sale, absence of transfer of goods involved in works contract, double taxation or the like, merely on the ground that the deeming provision contained in section 5(2)(AA)(i) does not authorise such enquiry. The assessing officers shall do well in completing the assessments by the 31st of December, 1988. Question of refund would depend upon the circumstances indicated in section 14 of the Act. 18.. In the result, the writ applications are allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. R.C. PATNAIK, J.-I agree. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1988 (5) TMI 354 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... r on 15th May, 1987. They filed the present writ petitions in this Court on 31st December, 1987. Thus, there is absolutely no delay on the part of the petitioners to approach this Court for the refund of the amount. The stand taken by the State of Haryana that it has gone in appeal against the judgments of this Court to the Supreme Court is of no consequence unless any stay orders are obtained from the Supreme Court in this behalf. In the aforementioned circumstances, both the petitions succeed and are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to the refund of the amount as held by the Sales Tax Tribunal on the basis of the judgments of this Court. The amounts as claimed by the petitioners in these writ petitions be refunded to them after verification within three months from today, failing which the petitioners will be entitled to interest at the rate of 6 per cent from the date of the order till realisation. There will, however, be no order as to costs. Writ Petitions allowed.
-
1988 (5) TMI 353 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the facts of the case are quite similar to the facts of State of Orissa v. Sri D.N. Joshi 1971 27 STC 100 (Orissa) and so being bound by the precedent it is not possible to take a different view. A different view could be possible only if the dealer would have produced the agreements or the work orders of the customers, if any, as well as the books of accounts showing the divisibility of the contracts for sale of materials, as well as the printing and labour charges. As this was not done by the dealer, the sum of Rs. 32,615.25 is exigible to sales tax and cannot be excluded from its taxable turnover. Accordingly, the question is answered in the affirmative. 9.. In the result, so far as question No. (1) is concerned, the case is remitted back to the Sales Tax Tribunal for examination in the light of the observations made in the judgment. Question No. (2) is answered in the affirmative. Parties to bear their own costs. R.C. PATNAIK, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1988 (5) TMI 352 - SUPREME COURT
Whether they were inter- state sales?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal as well as the High Court that the sales by the Chemical Co. to the Trading Co. were inter-state sales cannot be faulted and the learned counsel for the appellant has not advanced a single reason showing how that conclusion is incorrect
-
1988 (5) TMI 351 - SUPREME COURT
SALES TAX — POINT OF TAXATION — FIRST SALE IN STATE — ANOTHER DEALER ALREADY ASSESSED ON SAME TURNOVER - REASSESSMENT — NOTICE — WHETHER PERMISSIBLE ON CHANGE OF OPINION — POINT NOT DECIDED BY SUPREME COURT
-
1988 (5) TMI 342 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the law reports namely, All India Reporter, Criminal Law journal, Labour and Industrial Cases, Taxation Law Reports, Allahabad Law Journal and U.P. Law Tribune published by the 1st respondent, All India Reporter Limited, are newspapers as defined in the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (Act No. 45 of 1955)?
Whether the employees of the 1st respondent engaged in the production or publication of the said law reports are entitled to the benefits conferred upon the employees of newspaper establishments by the Act?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The law reports published by the 1st respondent are newspapers and the employees employed by the 1st respondent in their production or publication of the said law reports should be extended the benefit of the orders passed by the Central Government on the basis of the recommendations made by the Palekar Award. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court and dismiss the writ petition filed by the 1st respondent before the High Court.
-
1988 (5) TMI 338 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the acquisition of coffee by the Board is compulsory acquisition or is it purchase or sale?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. As we see the position and the scheme of the Act, in the instant case, there was contract as contemplated between the growers and the Coffee Board. The imposition of tax in a manner done by the sales tax authorities which has been upheld by the High Court is correct and the High Court was right.
-
1988 (5) TMI 335 - SUPREME COURT
Whether an order of assessment under sub-section (3) of section 11 of the Punjab Act or section 28(3) of the Haryana Act can now be completed or would that be barred by limitation?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. A period of limitation has been prescribed for bringing the escaped turnover into the net of taxation, such an eventuality cannot be grappled with appropriately unless timely assessment is completed. In several taxing statutes, even in a situation like this, where assessment under section 11(3) or 28(3) of the respective Acts is contemplated, a period of limitation is provided. Until by statute, such a limitation is provided, it is proper for the State Governments to require, by statutory rules or appropriate instructions, to ensure completion of assessments with expedition and reasonable haste but subject to rules of natural justice.
-
1988 (5) TMI 329 - SUPREME COURT
Whether there is a sale or not?
Whether there is transfer of property?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. It is not necessary to consider this submission, because, according to us, in view of the said agreement, considered in the light of the surrounding circumstances, the assessee as distributor was not an agent of the said company in respect of the transactions in question, but was the purchaser and hence the transactions were liable to be included in the turn- over of the assessee.
-
1988 (5) TMI 327 - SUPREME COURT
Whether rule 25-A(5) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules, 1948 in so far as it stipulates that a "recognition certificate" issued for purposes of section 4-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 "shall take effect from the date of its issue" is inconsistent with, does not carry out the purposes of and, therefore, is ultra vires, section 4-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. There is nothing unreasonable in this construction of section 4-B. Indeed by the 1978 Amendment, this position has been made clear in the rule itself which, after the amendment, expressly provides that the certificate will take effect from the date of the application made by the dealer and not merely from the date of the issue.
-
1988 (5) TMI 304 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Shares – Allotment of, Winding up – Definition of contributory, Copy of winding up order to be filed with Registrar, Power of Tribunal to make calls, Application for stay of winding up proceedings
-
1988 (5) TMI 296 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... alue such charges incurred after removal of the goods from the factory gate have to be excluded. In the record before us, no break-up of the charges incurred up to the factory gate and those incurred later is available. The appellants, during the hearing before us, were fair enough to accept the duty liability on - (i) Such charges proved to have been incurred up to the factory gate stage (ii) Even though incurred after the factory gate stage but to the extent the recovery on account of such charges from the customers was in excess of the expenses incurred by the appellants on such activity. In view of the offer made by the appellants, we direct the Collector to re-determine the appellants rsquo duty liability in respect of the delivery charges and forwarding and handling charges in the light of our observations above. Upon such determination, the appellants shall pay the duty determined by the Collector. 4. emsp In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the above terms.
-
1988 (5) TMI 291 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Tension stringing equipment - Comprising different machines and articles ... ... ... ... ..... d therefore, note 3 of Section XVI is not applicable. Nor are they machines for lifting, for handling, for loading, for unloading. They are not even of the same kind as a horizontal jack which the importers claim as alternative argument. 11. emsp In their claim for assessment under Heading 84.22 the assessees do not state what item under this head the goods are. The heading covers lifts, hoists, cranes, winchs, but we are not told much what these machines are. We are merely told what they do, but we should also have an explanation of what they are held by the importers to be whether they are lifts, hoists or jacks etc. etc. 12. emsp The learned counsel for M/s. Dodsal made a claim for assessment of the individual items on merits. We can, however, except only their plea for assessment of the reel elevator as a jack to be assessed under Heading 84.22. We direct its assessment accordingly. 13. emsp For other items, the order of the Collector is in order shall remain undisturbed.
-
1988 (5) TMI 290 - COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... rning depreciation and is not just marginally over this limit. The period of three years beyond the limit of four years cannot be easily ignored. But on the other hand the fact that the importer has chosen to bring in the car would show it is still economical and efficient. Therefore, while some ad hoc depreciation beyond fourth year is meritted it need not be comparable to the prescribed scale for any of the four years. No fixed scale can be laid down and only a ad hoc depreciation can be given. 5. In the circumstances, I hold that if for each successive year (repeat year) after the fourth year the depreciation of 4 for fifth year, 3 for sixth year and 2 for each successive year is allowed it should be a reasonable modality for working out the assessable value of the car in the instant case. 6. Accordingly I set aside the order of original assessment and direct reassessment in the light of formula decided in the preceding paragraph with consequential relief to the appellant.
-
1988 (5) TMI 288 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Seized gold bangles ... ... ... ... ..... es were no more available for further investigation . It is a well settled proposition of law that in a given situation, when two views are possible, the view favourable to the party concerned who is accused of the offence under the Act will have to be adopted the proceedings being penal in nature. Apart from it, when the appellate authority has on the consideration of evidence given a finding that what was seized was not primary gold, such a finding would not call for interference in appeal unless the same is found to be totally untenable. The fact that a different view is possible cannot be a ground to fasten penal liability on the respondents at the appellate stage. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, I am inclined to hold the reasoning of the lower appellate authority that the respondents would be entitled to the benefit of doubt in the peculiar circumstances of the case. In this view of the matter, I uphold the impugned order appealed against and dismiss the appeal.
-
1988 (5) TMI 286 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... he learned Counsel said that the nuts and screws are not capable of being sold in the market, they were used exclusively by themselves in the manufacture of radiograms. Sale in the market is irrelevant Central Excise is attracted only to manufacture and not to sale. If a person manufactures excisable goods and throws them away, he will still have to pay Central Excise duty he cannot claim that he did not sell the goods in the market and so no excise duty was payable by him. The firm accepts the gramophone motors do not lose their character even when they are used for the manufacture of toys, cars fans, they remain electric motors. In the same way, bolts, nuts and screws do not lose their identity as bolts and nuts and screws even when they are components of radiograms and other machines. 8. I am of the opinion that the assessment of the bolts, nuts and screws under Item 52 by the Assistant Collector was correct. I, therefore, direct that assessment should be done accordingly.
-
1988 (5) TMI 283 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... f material facts on the part of the appellants. 5. emsp In appreciating this contention we should have in mind the nature of the product on which demand was being raised for payment of duty. The appellants are running a sugar factory. Sugarcane is crushed and the by-product, arising out of such crushing, is bagasse. The Department could hardly be allowed to contend that they were unaware of the production of bagasse by the appellants. Bagasse is an inevitable by product of sugarcane crushing in the manufacture of sugar. The same emerges in huge quantities and it cannot be accepted that removals of such bagasse was clandestine and that the production of the same was suppressed. 6. In the circumstances we hold that the demand for the period 1-3-1975 to 29-4-1975 (under notice dated 3-12-1979) was barred by time. 7. emsp This appeal is accordingly allowed and the orders of the lower authorities are set aside so far as the demand for the period 1-3-1975 to 29-4-1975 is concerned.
........
|
