|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 201 to 220 of 276 Records
-
1992 (7) TMI 82 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Export - Advance Licence ... ... ... ... ..... order in respect of that. I however, direct if any steps are taken by the Licensing Authority, the petitioner should be given a hearing before passing any such order. 15. I also make it clear that this order will not prevent the respondents from proceeding in accordance with law against the petitioner for mis-description in respect of the goods. The petitioner will also be entitled to defend itself in accordance with law. 16. The petitioner will not be entitled to get any advantage of import entitlement on the strength of the false declaration made on 7th May, 1992. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. The interim orders are vacated. The respondents shall return the licence and other documents to the petitioner within a period of fortnight from date after making xerox copies thereof. All parties including the Allahabad Bank, International Branch, Park Street, Calcutta shall act on the signed copy of the operative part of mis judgment on the usual undertaking.
-
1992 (7) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Writ petition at show cause notice stage ... ... ... ... ..... t No. 3 is yet to make up his mind on the issue after considering the reply of the petitioner. The respondent No. 3, after considering the reply of the petitioner and examining the correct legal position, may decide to drop the notices. It will not be appropriate for this Court to stall the proceedings which are maintainable under the Act. Needless to say, if the petitioner feels aggrieved by the order passed by the respondent No. 3 it will be open to it to challenge the same at the relevant forums and eventually before this Court by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 8. However, while declining to interfere in the matter at this stage, we would like to direct the respondent No. 3 to decide the issue on merits and in accordance with law, specially the cases noted above and relied upon by the counsel for the parties, and the respondent No. 3 is so directed. 9. Subject to the observations and direction made above the petition shall stand dismissed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Writ Jurisdiction - Existence of alternative remedy ... ... ... ... ..... rticular view on the facts of the case. If according to him the facts of the case do not warrant giving an option to the petitioner, then it is for the appellate authority to decide whether on the facts of the case the discretion should have been exercised in favour of the petitioner and an option should have been given to him to redeem the goods. That is a question which can be decided only by the appellate authority and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 10. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the remedy of the petitioner is to file appeals before the appellate authority and seek appropriate reliefs. 11. The writ petitions are dismissed. 12. It is now orally represented that in the normal course, the appeals will take about two or three years and if that is so, the petitioner will suffer great loss. If the petitioner prefers appeals, the appellate authority is directed to dispose of the same within four weeks from the date of filing of the appeals.
-
1992 (7) TMI 76 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Rate of duty - Customs ... ... ... ... ..... 86 could therefore be traced to specific and live sources of legislative power. The mere fact that another power of granting exemption is vested in the authority under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962, would not, in any way, impair the efficacy or validity of the Regulations framed by the competent authorities. 7. We are not satisfied that the Regulations are bad for excessive delegation. The enactments in question and the subsidiary and delegated legislations, and the exercises of such powers by the various enumerated authorities, are to be understood as partaking a comprehensive scheme of fiscal administration. A dissection and disintegration, and examination in exclusion and without the larger background of enactments, is not a proper approach for a Constitutional Court to be adopted in such circumstances. 8. In the light of the discussion, we hold that there is no merit in the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners. Consequently, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Valuation (Customs) - Transaction value when acceptable - Adjudication - Import policy - Interpretation - Evidence - Affidavit
-
1992 (7) TMI 72 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Warehoused goods (Customs) ... ... ... ... ..... of the modified public notice of 15th January 1992, makes it clear that there is a reasonable classification of different categories of importers from whom bank guarantees at different percentages are required. The reason why a bank guarantee is also required tb set out in the Board s letters referred to earlier. The public notices also do not take away the discretion of the proper officer not to demands bank guarantee in a suitable case. Hence the public notice of 15th January 1992, which substantially modifies the public notice of 11th June 1990 is not arbitrary or unreasonable. In the premises all the writ petitions are dismissed and the rule is discharged. We have already given liberty to the respondents to apply in the circumstances set out earlier in petitions falling in categories 1A and 2A. A similar liberty is granted to the respondents in the writ petitions falling in Categories 1B and 2B, since similar interim orders have been -passed in all these writ petitions.
-
1992 (7) TMI 71 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Prosecution - Baggage - Charge of incomplete declaration of imported jewellery ... ... ... ... ..... cord in the companion Appeal (505 of 82) also shows that in pursuance of the action taken under Section 390 Cr. P.C. the warrant of arrest was executed and the present appellant was taken in custody on 20-10-1982 and that he was released on bail on 25-10-1982. Thus having regard to the total custody period for which the appellant is entitled to be given set off under Section 428 Cr. P.C. it will not be necessary for the appellant to surrender to custody for undergoing any remaining part of the sentence awarded to him by the Court below. Since he has paid the fine, there is no question of undergoing the default sentence. 14. In the result, the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act are confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. The appellant is entitled to be given set off for the custody period. The appellant is not required to surrender to custody as stated above (in the judgment). His bail bonds are formally cancelled.
-
1992 (7) TMI 70 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, INDORE BENCH
Seizure - Customs- Show Cause Notice not issued within six months ... ... ... ... ..... . 123. Therefore, the onus does not shift on the petitioner in respect of silver which has no foreign mark on it nor the currency notes. As such the petitioners could not be called upon to prove that the silver and currency notes seized are not connected with any smuggled goods. It is the duty of the respondents to prove this fact which they have failed to prove in the instant case. 7. In view of the aforesaid it is manifest that the seizure of the goods in question by the respondents was without jurisdiction and subsequent to the seizure no notice under clause (a) of S. 124 of the Customs Act was given to the petitioners. Therefore, the goods are liable to be returned under S. 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. 8. In the result this petition is allowed and the order of seizure of the goods is quashed. The respondents are directed to return the seized silver and currency notes to the person or persons from whose possession they were seized. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1992 (7) TMI 69 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Stay/Dispensation of prior deposit ... ... ... ... ..... ctor meant by the words cause of hardship is backed by adverse financial position based on evidence . If the Tribunal disbelieved the statement that the petitioner had become a Sick Industry it might be called upon the petitioner to prove that by producing the evidence. Definitely the case in the petition before the Board that it becomes the Sick Industry the date of the order, the case number and everything was disclosed and a copy of the order was enclosed. It appears that the Collector did not care to read the enclosures of the stay petition. 5. Under these circumstances, the order passed by the Collector dated 29-1-1992 (Annexure G ) is quashed. The Appellate Authority will hear out the appeal against the order of the respondent No. 2 made on 1-4-1991 on merit without any pre-deposit of money. 6. The writ petition is finally disposed of. 7. Let a Xerox copy of this order be handed over to the learned Counsels appearing for both the parties on usual terms and undertaking.
-
1992 (7) TMI 68 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, INDORE BENCH
Medicaments - Ayurvedic - Statutory definition lacking - Interpretation of taxing statute - Writ jurisdiction
-
1992 (7) TMI 66 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Income, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... evelopment Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India. Apart from salary and allowance, he had also received, during the relevant assessment years, incentive bonus commission. This has been held to be the professional income of the assessee for these assessment years. This finding is not under challenge. The assessee, however, claimed that 40 per cent. of the incentive commission received by him should be allowed as a deduction for the probable and likely expense for earning the incentive bonus. The Tribunal has accepted the assessee s claim and directed the Income-tax Officer to allow 40 per cent. of the incentive bonus commission as a deduction. The deduction so allowed is based on a finding of fact as to the quantum of expenses likely to have been incurred by the assessee for the purpose of earning the incentive bonus commission and hence no question of law arises which can be required to be referred to us. The rule is, therefore, discharged. No order as to costs.
-
1992 (7) TMI 65 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Bonus, Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ployer may have to pay bonus further straining its finances by reason merely of the general practice in the particular trade or business. The assessee here is engaged in plantation, growing and manufacturing of tea. Tea plantation labour is highly organised labour and the tea grower and manufacturer has to go by the general treaty which the planters enter into with the plantation workers. This aspect has not been gone into by the Tribunal. We consider that, profit or no profit, if the other planters have paid their workers and employees bonus at a particular rate, it becomes a compulsion on every planter to pay bonus at a comparable rate. That factor alone may justify the payment or provision therefor as reasonable. Accordingly, we decline to answer the question and remit the matter to the Tribunal to ask the Assessing Officer to make a fresh enquiry in the light of our observations and decide the issue accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. K. M. YUSUF J.-I agree.
-
1992 (7) TMI 64 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Charitable Trust ... ... ... ... ..... the income-tax authorities in the context of the special circumstances which accompany a sale by a public trust. The purchaser can also apply, in accordance with law, for early sanction by the Charity Commissioner. The ratio of the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Tanvi Trading and Credits P. Ltd. v. Appropriate Authority 1991 188 ITR 623, has no application to the present case. The decision of a Division Bench of this court (Pendse and Jhunjhunwala JJ.) dated March 11, 1991, in Writ Petition No. 683 of 1991 (Irwin Almeida v. Union of India 1992 197 ITR 609) also cannot apply because this is not a case where the income-tax authorities have purported to examine the title of the parties to the agreement or questioned their right to enter into the agreement. There is a clear statutory prohibition in the present case against the sale of immovable property of a public trust without the approval of the Charity Commissioner. In the premises, the petition is dismissed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 63 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Regular Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... Swarup, ITO v. Gammon India Ltd. 1983 141 ITR 841 (Bom) (6) CIT v. Ganeshram Nayak 1981 129 ITR 43 (Orissa). In view of the definition of regular assessment in section 2(40) which has restricted the meaning only to the assessments made under section 143 or 144, the interest under sections 215 and 217 is payable only up to the date of the regular assessment under these sections on the basis of the tax determined on regular assessment. The interest, therefore, cannot be charged up to the date or on the basis of a reassessment made under section 147. In view of this interpretation of law, we are of the view that the view taken by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is in accordance with law and the Tribunal was right in holding that interest cannot be charged under section 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on reassessment made under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The reference is answered accordingly in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1992 (7) TMI 62 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e to answer the question on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to consider and decide the question whether the land was agricultural land from the correct angle, i.e., it has not considered the question whether the land in question was agricultural land or not from the proper perspective and from the proper angle and has not applied the correct law to this point and its whole approach was erroneous in the light of the law as explained by this court in the case of Manilal Somnath 1977 106 ITR 917 and by the Supreme Court in the case of CWT v. Officer-in-Charge (Court of Wards) 1976 105 ITR 133. It will be open to the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in the light of the observations made by the Division Bench in the case of Smt. Chandravati Atmaram Patel 1978 114 ITR 302 (Guj), after approaching the question from the correct angle as explained by the Division Bench in the said judgment. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1992 (7) TMI 61 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... l that the liability may arise under section 221 of the Act, no attempt was made by the Revenue before the Tribunal to permit the Revenue to take action under section 221 of the said Act. Since, in reference jurisdiction, our jurisdiction is advisory and since reframing of question is not permissible for us in the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that the request of Mr. B. J. Shelat cannot be entertained. In our advisory jurisdiction, we are required to give our opinion on the questions which are actually referred to us for our opinion and which arise out of the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, we may observe that the Revenue will be at liberty to take appropriate proceedings against the assessee in accordance with law. We answer the reference accordingly by answering the questions referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
-
1992 (7) TMI 60 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Accounting, Reference ... ... ... ... ..... anubhai P. Patel, an individual. In fact, the order passed by the Commission shows that it decided to throw the baby out with the bath water without pausing to consider how, due to any contamination in the bath water, the baby also could be thrown out. Consequently, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy between the parties, these petitions are allowed. The orders of the Commission at annexure C so far as the seven petitioners are concerned are quashed and set aside. The seven applications moved by the concerned petitioners are restored to the file of the Commission with the direction to proceed further beyond the stage of section 245D(1) and to treat them as having been admitted for settlement and to deal with them in accordance with law and also to pass appropriate orders on the merits in these applications as per section 245D(4). Rules issued in these petitions are made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs in each one of them.
-
1992 (7) TMI 59 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... notice had to be issued to the petitioner under section 163(2) of the Act because under that provision, no person shall be treated as an agent of a non-resident unless he had had an opportunity of being heard by the Assessing Officer as to his liability to be treated as such. This point does not arise in this case because the petitioner s own case in the return filed with the Income-tax Department is that the amount paid by them to the foreign collaborator on account of lump sum consideration for technical know-how was not liable to tax under the Act. Moreover, the return is also filed in the capacity of a representative assessee with the appended note referred to above. In the circumstances, this point does not arise. All the same, we leave it open to the petitioner to raise this point in reply to the notice under section 148 of the Act. Accordingly, we allow the petitioner to file a reply to the show-cause notice under section 148 of the Act and dismiss this writ petition.
-
1992 (7) TMI 58 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Depreciation, Expenditure On Scientific Research, New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction
-
1992 (7) TMI 57 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n the said case, at the time of partition, the coparcener had his daughter with him. It was held that the assessee constituted a joint family and, therefore, the property was held as Hindu undivided family property. This decision certainly supports the contention of the assessee before us. The presence of a minor daughter with the sole coparcener resulted in bringing out a Hindu undivided family. Earlier, we have emphasised one sentence in Krishna Prasad s decision 1970 75 ITR 526 rendered by this court wherein it was stated that, when the sole member marries and has a wife, he would be entitled to be assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family. The Supreme Court, while affirming this decision, has not expressed any doubt about this proposition though it was not necessary for this court to make the aforesaid observation. We are in respectful agreement with the said statement. Consequently, the question referred to us is answered in the negative and against the Revenue.
....
|
