Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1992 1992 (1) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 41 to 60 of 292 Records

• 1992 (1) TMI 323 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ich is pending disposal. 2.. Question as to from what date petitioner is entitled to avail exemption can be adjudicated while hearing appeal of opposite party No. 1. A party who is likely to be affected by any order to be passed in an appeal, is entitled to be heard under rule 51 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 (in short the Rules ). If the appellate authority holds that forms issued by the petitioner were not in order, obviously it shall be affected. In this connection letter of SAIL to the petitioner demanding reimbursement of amount raised against it as tax demand is relevant. We therefore, direct opposite party No. 7 to grant petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard before disposal of appeal filed by opposite party No. 1 relating to the assessment year 1987-88. The Assistant Commissioner shall do well to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as feasible. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. No costs. S.K. MOHANTY, J.-I agree.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 322 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... Tax Act. We are of the view that so far as the language of the provisions of the Act applicable to the present case is concerned, there is no question of any intention of the dealer. The taxable event is the purchase by the last dealer who buys in the State. How the purchase by the dealer becomes the last purchase is not relevant. It is not in dispute that as regards the cotton purchased by the petitioner and destroyed by fire in its hands, the petitioner was the last purchaser. That he purchased the cotton intending to again sell the same and that he could not sell the cotton because of the supervening circumstances is not relevant for determining whether the turnover is attracted to tax under section 6 of the Act. In the circumstances, we do not see any error of law in the order of the Appellate Tribunal as regards the taxability of the said turnover of Rs. 1,14,67,488 in question in this tax revision case. The tax revision case is therefore dismissed. Petition dismissed.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 321 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... later occasions. It is, therefore, clear that the air-conditioners were supplied as standard units and had not to be manufactured according to the specifications pursuant to the contract. The wires, ducts and other ancillaries were not parts of the air-conditioning units, but were necessary for installation thereof. The supply thereof and the work of installation of the air-conditioning unit were incidental to the sale of the air-conditioner, but did not amount to a composite and indivisible works contract. It is also clear that the Deputy Commissioner and the Tribunal were right in finding that the supply of wires, ducts, etc., and service involved in fixing up the air-conditioner were incidental to the sale of the air-conditioners to the customer. In this view, we do not find any error in the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. No question of law was wrongly decided or omitted to be decided. The revision cases are therefore dismissed. No costs. Petitions dismissed.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 320 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... as molasses transport and handling charges and willingly paid by the customers to the assessee cannot form part of the turnover. Whether the assessee could have collected the additional amounts under the law or not and whether if any such collections are made he would be liable for any penal action, is not the question before us. The fact that the said amounts were collected from the customers at the time of sale of the rectified spirit to them is not in dispute. That is enough to attract the said collections into the net of turnover as defined in section 2(s) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, because those amounts fall under any other sum charged by the dealer, whatever be the description, name or object thereof . We therefore do not find that the Tribunal decided any question of law erroneously or failed to decide any question of law arising on the facts of the case. The tax revision cases are dismissed. Advocate s fee Rs. 250 in each. Petitions dismissed.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 319 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... er different. Such an interception by a known person on behalf of the seller in the delivery State and such person s activities prior to or after the implementation of the contract may not alter the position. To similar effect were the observations of the Apex Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer 1985 60 STC 301. 5.. The Tribunal has found with reference to materials that transactions between supplier and customers constituted inter-State sales. The conclusion is essentially factual. There is no perversity attached to the conclusion. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal was justified in its conclusion that the sales in question were inter-State in character and the assessee was not liable to pay sales tax in Orissa. We answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference application is accordingly disposed of. S.K. MOHANTY, J.-I agree. Reference answered in the affirmative.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 318 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... by the State Government under section 8(5) after issue of that notification during the relevant years. Regarding the common and commercial parlance meaning of the tyre cord fabric I feel that same is fully covered by the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court reported in 1980 46 STC 256 (Delhi Cloth and General Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan) wherein, the tyre cord fabric has been treated to be a textile fabric. The definition of the textile as reproduced and considered by their Lordships leaves no doubt in my mind that in common and commercial parlance the tyre cord fabric is a textile fabric and there is no distinction between textile and textile fabric. The alleged change in the definition of Additional Duties of Excise Act has no relevance in view of specific notification existing under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, exempting all varieties of textile. The revision has no force and is accordingly rejected. No order as to costs. Petition dismissed.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 317 - ITAT DELHI
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... od of two years is over. 1 am, therefore, of the opinion that, having regard to the above, the property in the goods passed from the assessee to the buyer only on March 1, 1985, as, by then, the buyer must be held to have signified his approval or acceptance to the seller having retalned.the goods with him without giving notice of rejection. It ls, therefore, wrong to say, on the peculiar facts of this case, that the sale was complete on March 1, 1983, itself when the machine was delivered and sale price received because, as I have mentioned earlier, even under a contract for sale on approval basis, there must be delivery of goods or machine. 1, therefore, hold that, on the facts and circumstances of this case, the property in the goods, i.e., the machine did not pass on to the vendee and hence there was no sale in the accounting period relevant to the assessment year under appeal. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for decision according to the majority opinion.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 316 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... Authority. No adverse order could be passed against the Life Insurance Corporation without affording them an opportunity of hearing. The forfeiture order relating to the policy detailed above is bad and cannot be upheld. The Competent Authority has held that the appellant had withdrawn Rs. 2,665 from the capital account in the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 indicating that he may have taken another life insurance policy, particulars of which in the form of policy number, the sum assured and the premium payable are not forthcoming. The Competent Authority has forfeited such unspecified policy also. The forfeiture of an unspecified policy with the Life Insurance Corporation is infructuous and cannot be allowed to stand. In view of the discussion above, the forfeiture order of the Competent Authority, vis-a-vis, the life insurance policies, is set aside. The remaining forfeiture order of the Competent Authority shall stand. The appeal is partly allowed as indicated above.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 315 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Recovery proceedings - Held that:- In spite of the fact that the application for waiver of the pre-deposit has been filed before the Collector (Appeals), the Tribunal Central Excise is proceeding for recovery against the petitioner without waiting for the decision on the application for waiver of the pre-deposit thus directed that till the petitioner's application for waiver of the pre-deposit filed on 20.8.1990 is not disposed of recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall remain stayed.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 314 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Disposal of the stay applications - Recovery proceedings - Held that:- Since the petitioner had already filed appeals against the impugned orders along with stay applications and the stay applications are still pending, we think that the action of the Superintendent, Central Excise seeking recovery of the amount demanded is wholly unjustified. The recovery proceedings should have been remained stayed till the disposal of the stay application.

  Also till the disposal of the stay applications which are fixed for 29.1.1992 and 13.2.1992, the goods of the petitioner shall remain attached but shall not be auctioned.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 313 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Valuation - Contemporaneous import - Undervaluation - EXIM - Import licence - Consumer goods

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... 0 pieces whereas the appellants imported 1500 pieces and 1000 pieces respectively. Similarly, the quantity of Horns A(5002) 12V imported or 2000 pieces whereas under invoice No. 225/0521A/90, the total number of Horns imported are 800 pieces. 13. emsp A reading of Rule 5 makes it clear that in applying the said rule the transaction value of identical goods in sale at the same time and in a sale at the same commercial level and in substantially the same quantity should be taken. As pointed out earlier the quantity imported by the appellants and the quantity imported under the invoices cannot be said to be substantially the same quantity. Therefore, the Collector is not justified in applying Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. We have also pointed out that the invoices are subsequent to the impugned imports and therefore, they are not relevant for the reasons mentioned above. Therefore, I set aside the order of the Collector and direct them to accept the invoice price.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 312 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Levying Central sales tax in respect of certain transactions of the petitioners is challenged - Held that:- Considering petitioner submission that while they have paid a high rate of local sales tax, they are being called upon to pay Central sales tax on the very same transactions and that this is causing great hardship to the petitioners we, therefore, direct the respondents that they should not take any steps to recover the amount of Central sales tax payable by the petitioners on the transactions in respect of which they have already paid sales tax in other States as intra-State sales. This stay will continue till the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal disposes of the appeal of the petitioners which is now pending before it.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 305 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether Government Order No. 159-Ind. dated 26th March, 1971 and the amending Government Order No. 414-Ind. dated 25th August, 1971, are orders of exemption referable to section 5 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1962?

  Held that:- Appeal allowed. To sum up G.O. No. 159-Ind. dated 26th March, 1971 and G.O. No. 414- Ind. dated 25th August, 1971, are exemption from payment of sales tax orders referable to the powers of the Government under section 5 of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act and that exemption covers the entire series of sales of the goods comprehended within it but that the exemption was available only for a period of five years from the date of commissioning of the industries and not for ten years. The benefit of the exemption under the said Government orders are also available in respect of the inter-State sales of the same commodities for a period of five years from the commencement of the commercial production.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 303 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether the additional tax levied under the Kerala Additional Sales Tax Act is also to be considered as sales tax under the "sales tax law" of the State?

  Held that:- Appeal allowed. There were no notifications under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act and simply the applicability of section 8(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act alone is involved. The orders of the High Court are set aside and the respective assessment orders are restored.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 296 - SUPREME COURT
  

  TURNOVER — DEDUCTIONS — RESALE OF GOODS PURCHASED FROM REGISTERED DEALER - BATTERIES — MANUFACTURER REMOVING ELECTROLYTE BEFORE TRANSPORTING BATTERIES TO DEALER

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 286 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
  

  Companies Law Board – Power of, Company Law Board – Appeal against orders of

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... been against the rules and he has demonstrated how the rules are ultra vires. In the circumstances as above, we refrain from giving and give no direction to terminate the appointments already made. We, however, feel constrained to observe that the respondents shall be duty-bound to reframe the rules as observed above and such reframing must be completed within a framework of a time-schedule. For the exercise in this behalf, a period of nine (9) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order will be reasonable and proper. Accordingly, the respondents are given nine (9) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order for the said purpose. It is, however, made clear that the respondents shall not fill in any existing vacancy or any vacancy that may be created within the period above until the rules are reframed. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the observations and directions as above. There will, however, be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 285 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
  

  Shares warrants and entries in register of members, Powers of Court to rectify register of members

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 272 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
  

  Company when deemed unable to pay its debts, Winding up – Appointment and powers of provisional liquidator

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 265 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  MODVAT Credit

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... oduct and name of the respondent company as well as other particulars which connect them with the respondent rsquo s specific product.. Further what is being done in the job work is merely to cut the said sheets into individual cut pieces and the actual packing of the blades is being done in the appellant rsquo s own factory. The fact that during the process of packing the blades the machine folds these aluminium sheets into tucks shows that they are being used as a packaging material and merely because at a particular stage (that is after folding) they are called tucks does not make any material difference to this situation. In the circumstances, the departmental circular cited by the learned DR does not advance the department rsquo s cause. Even otherwise it is not binding. That apart the department itself admits that Rule 57A allows modvat credit for packing material. In the circumstances we hold that the learned Collector (Appeals) was right. Hence we dismiss the appeal.

  ---

• 1992 (1) TMI 256 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... lector determining the price of the imported second-hand Solna 225, Two Colour offset printing machines, on the basis of the import price of a similar machine imported by another importer and the price of the lsquo Guilltone 45 rdquo Polar 115 Electromat on the basis of the price list issued by another supplier of second-hand machinery is not sustainable. In our view the assessable value of the imported goods comprising of two second-hand Solna 225-Two Colour offset printing machines and one old lsquo Guilltone 45 Polar 15 Electromat rsquo machine was determinable on the basis of the unit price of each type of machine as indicated in the supplier s invoice. Since the case records do not contain the invoice and the Chartered Engineer s certificate, we remand the case to the Assistant Collector for determining the assessable value of the machines and the consequential relief to the appellants if any. 8. emsp The appeal is, therefore, allowed in the above terms by way of remand.

  ---

1234567........ 15