|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 240 Records
-
1993 (1) TMI 109 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessing Officer, Expenditure Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ot be attributed to the assessee on the other count of corrections found in the registration card as well as in the admission register as they are maintained on day-to-day basis with the hotel staff keeping an eye on the guests and servants visiting the customer in his suite room. May be the corrections were warranted in terms of rule 3 of the Hotel Regulations or it may be due to genuine mistakes committed by the staff on day-to-day basis. In some cases, the registration card does not mention the number of person occupying the room. Further, it is noticed that in a few cases where the assessee has mentioned d/o (double occupancy) the Annexure mentions o/w (over writing). In certain cases some one else confirms the occupancy on behalf of the occupant in their letter to the Income-tax Officer. Therefore, it cannot be conclusively said that such corrections were attempted by the assessee with the deliberate intention of evading the tax. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 108 - ITAT COCHIN
Interest Income, Minor Child ... ... ... ... ..... ee. Section 80L is concerned with the deduction to be allowed from the gross total income and the issue is governing favour of the revenue, directly, by the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. P.N. Ramaswamy 1984 146 ITR 627, which is as under ---- Section 80L of the I.T. Act. 1961, can be availed of only by an assessee and as the total income of a husband as defined in section 2(24) would include the income arising to the wife in respect of which section 64(1)(iii) would operate, the provisions of section 80L cannot be applied to the income arising to the wife which has to be included in the hands of the husband under section 64(1)(iii) because, in respect of that income, the wife cannot be considered as the assessee. Consequently, the relief under section 80L would be available to the husband after the wife s income has been clubbed with his income. Thus, on this point the argument of the assessee fails. 12. In the result, the appeals are allowed in part
-
1993 (1) TMI 107 - ITAT BANGALORE
Interest Paid By Firm To Partner, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... idered and gone into by the CIT as he did not consider it necessary in view of the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Khoday Eswarsa and Sons. However, in the light of the later judgment in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works it has become all the more necessary to do so. This requires detailed consideration and appreciation of evidence to be adduced by the assessee in this regard. No further evidence has been adduced by the parties before us at the time of hearing either. In these facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, we consider it necessary and proper to restore the matter to the CIT for fresh disposal after considering the evidence, if any, adduced by the assessee in this regard for which the assessee is to be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly the revisional order of the CIT is set aside and the entire matter is restored to him for fresh adjudication. 10. In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes
-
1993 (1) TMI 106 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Assessment Order, Assessment Proceedings, Delay In Submission, Levy Of Penalty, Penalty Proceedings, Reasonable Cause, Show-cause Notice
-
1993 (1) TMI 105 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Amezole tablet ... ... ... ... ..... ted that where the statute itself provides the Petitioners with an efficacious alternate remedy, it is not for this Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution ignoring as it were, the complete statutory machinery. We, however, cannot over-look the fact that this petition filed in 1983 has been entertained by this Court and given a hearing on merit on its entirely to the parties. In the facts of the case, it would now be too late in the day to ask the Petitioners to avail of the alternate statutory remedy after lapse of about ten years. 8.In the circumstances, we hold that Amezole Tablets were exempted under the said Notification. The Petition is allowed and the Rule is made absolute. The bank guarantee and for bond furnished in pursuance of interim order passed on 28th March, 1983, to stand cancelled after a period of ten weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs. 9.Issuance of certified copy on application is expedited.
-
1993 (1) TMI 104 - SC ORDER
Prosecution - Withdrawal of ... ... ... ... ..... alty, payable as a result of the impugned order, have been paid by the appellant. The appeal is dismissed. 2. Keeping in view the circumstance that this is an old matter and even in this Court the appeal has been pending for about eight years, we recommend to the authorities to consider withdrawing the criminal prosecution pending against the appellant.
-
1993 (1) TMI 103 - HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Block Board - Show cause notice - Reply ... ... ... ... ..... w cause notice granted only a 10-day time to the petitioner therein to file reply. Even on the express request of the petitioner s counsel time was not extended. In the context of that case, it was held that show cause notice allowing only 10 days time for reply and the consequential order were vitiated for flagrant violation of the instructions. This decision does not help the petitioner as the fact-position in the present case is distinguishable from that in Rajaram Corn Products case (supra). Apart from the above discussions, the point for determination is under which of the headings of the Tariff Schedule the Block Board in question is to be classified. In view of the conclusion above that the Block Board in question falls under Heading 44.08 (sub-heading 4408.90) after hearing the parties, the requirement of the giving of show cause notice by the proper authority has lost its importance. 12.In the result, the petition is dismissed. Interim order stands vacated. No costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 102 - SC ORDER
Disposal of confiscated goods during pendency of writ appeal ... ... ... ... ..... of the writ appeals and that there is no urgency to put the goods in auction. 3. After hearing the parties and perusing the records, we pass the following order The impugned order of the High Court with regard to the disposal of the property is set aside. The High Court is requested to dispose of the writ appeals as expeditiously as possible according to law preferably within a period of two months, from the date of the receipt of this order. The disposal of the goods shall abide the decision of the writ appeals by the High Court. 4. The appeals are disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 101 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Appeal - Transfer of jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... order of the first respondent is set aside. The Customs, Excise, Gold Control Tribunal at Madras will take on its file the papers relating to Order No. 261-A/262-A, dated 23-12-1987, on the file of the first respondent and dispose of the same in accordance with law. It is stated that pending disposal of the writ petition, the petitioners had the benefit of interim injunction. The same will continue pending disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal. The Tribunal will dispose of the appeal within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the records. The writ petition is allowed and the matter is remanded as indicated above. No costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 100 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the company is liable to pay duty under Tariff Item No. 27(c) in respect of process of backing of duty paid aluminium foils?
Held that:- Such a question can be decided on evidence as to how the article is known and recognised by those in the trade, industry or commerce dealing with the article. The finding of the court must be based on such evidence and not on its own perceptions of the matter. In this case, evidence on the point is conspicuous by its absence. Indeed, in a sense, there was nothing to traverse. Appellant, so far as the proceedings in judicial review are concerned could well have remained content with a demurrer. The Court cannot reach a conclusion on its own perception and appreciation of the matter. After hearing the learned counsel on both sides, we are of the view that on the material placed before the High Court, the conclusion reached by it is not sustainable.
Set aside the judgment of the High Court and remit the writ petition to the High Court for a fresh disposal.
-
1993 (1) TMI 99 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Dutiability - Goods - Marketability - Civil suit ... ... ... ... ..... ugar Mills (supra). 31. We are, therefore, unable to share the view taken by the learned Trial Judge that the goods were not excisable and the duty as mentioned in the plaint was levied and collected by mistake and without the authority of law. 32. In our opinion, the three type of sheets manufactured by the respondent are excisable goods even though they are used as articles at the intermediary stages in the process of manufacture of a final and different product vis. footwear. They may be raw materials for manufacture of further goods but they by themselves constitute goods. The view we take is reinforced by the fact that the case answered the description of Item Nos. 19 and 22 of the Schedule. Therefore, the levies and collections were lawful. 33. The decision on the merits against the respondent renders the question of limitation unnecessary and does not call for determination. Accordingly, the appeal fails. 34. There will be no order as to costs. J.N. Hore J. . -I agree.
-
1993 (1) TMI 98 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... since the filing of the writ petition. It is not proper for this Court at this stage to conclude that the petition is not maintainable. 14. As the question of limitation depends on the facts of the case and it has to be decided whether there was a misstatement of facts on the part of the petitioner, the conclusions of fact arrived at by the concerned authority in the impugned order have to be accepted as they do not suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record. There is no error of jurisdiction. 15. The fact that the Department was aware of the manufacture by the petitioner and that samples have been taken by the Department on more than one occasion would not alter the situation. What is required for the proviso is a misstatement of fact on the part of the person concerned and not the knowledge of the Department about the manufacture of the particular product. 16. In the result, the writ petition has to fail and it is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 97 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Modvat Credit - 'Appliance' - Meaning - Writ jurisdiction
... ... ... ... ..... (43) E.L.T. 201 (S.C.) Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur v. Rajasthan State Chemical Works AIR 1991 SCC 2222 1991 (55) E.L.T. 444 (S.C.) . That the process in question is commercially expedient has not been doubted. 24. For the reasons aforesaid the impugned order of the Assistant Collector cannot be sustained, and is accordingly quashed. The bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner in respect of the demand made under the impugned order is discharged. The claim of the petitioner for refund of any payment made pursuant to the interim order dated 10th April, 1991 may be obtained by the petitioners under Section 11B of the Act from the respondent authorities subject to the provisions of that section and in accordance with law. Such application must be disposed of within a period of eight weeks from the date of the communication of the order. Let a xerox copy of the judgment passed today be given to the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners, on his usual undertaking.
-
1993 (1) TMI 96 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... t attached then the petitioner will not get the benefit of the notification. But if the petitioner s factory does not have such a plant the petitioner will get the benefit of the notification. That is the dear meaning of the Statute. The natural meaning cannot be discarded for a meaning based on the supposed intention of the Government. If the Government intended the proviso to have some other meaning the Government should have said so in plain language. 4. The language of the proviso is clear. The petitioner manufactures paper in a factory of its own. The petitioner does not have a plant attached thereto for making bamboo pulp. The benefit of the notification cannot be denied to the petitioner. 5. In that view of the matter, the Rule is made absolute. The order of the Collector is quashed. 6. Several other points were taken in the writ petition. In the view I have taken on the point decided I do not express any opinion on the other points. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 94 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MODVAT Scheme ... ... ... ... ..... the Rules made thereunder to disallow the claim or benefit to which the petitioner or an individual manufacturer is entitled to under the MODVAT scheme on its own individual merits. It is also obvious that the MODVAT scheme introduced by statutory rules cannot be either nullified or short circuited by means of a clarification of the nature under challenge and it needs no further effort to declare that the claims of the petitioner to the benefits under the scheme if any, should be considered on their own merits and independent of the impugned proceedings. With this clarification and declaration of the legal position, the writ petitions shall stand finally disposed of. The disposal of these writ petitions will not stand in the way of the petitioner to challenge the validity of the same in any action that may be taken by the authorities at the appropriate stage on any one ground already raised or any of the other grounds that are otherwise available for the petitioner. No costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 92 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Confiscation of currency - Customs ... ... ... ... ..... earned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the passbook belonging to the petitioner to show that a large amount of Rs. 70,000/- was withdrawn from her Savings Bank account just prior to the search and seizure. Learned counsel would argue that the said documentary evidence corroborates the statement of the 4th respondent to the effect that the amount in question represents the balance of the amount drawn from the Savings Bank account after spending for repairs of the petitioner s house. As stated earlier, in the absence of specific claim by the petitioner stating that the amount in question belonged to her on coming to know of the seizure, and in view of the pendency of the adjudication proceedings, I do not want to enter into this disputed question of fact, 6. For all the reasons stated above, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to establish her claim in the adjudication proceedings, in accordance with law, this writ petition is dismissed. No Costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 91 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Confiscation of currency - Customs ... ... ... ... ..... he issue of a show cause notice and thereby sufficient compliance of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, in the circumstances of the case. On the other hand, on the facts of this case, the petitioner is entitled to a show cause notice. Likewise, when a consistent case has been made out right from the time of seizure till now, in the absence of any material to suspect the claim of the petitioner, there is no justification on the part of the respondents to retain the money. Section 110(2) read with Section 124 of the Customs Act fixed an outer limit for serving show cause notice as six months from the date of the seizure of the goods and that can be extended by another six months by an Order of Collector on sufficient cause being shown. In this case, the total period of one year is over long ago, and, in the light of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, the petitioner is entitled to the return of Rs. 16,100/- as prayed for. 7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Appeal - Condonation of delay ... ... ... ... ..... cision cited by the learned Counsel for the Revenue, namely, 1992 (60) E.L.T. 546 (supra), is distinguishable on facts, in the sense that in that case, me learned Judge has found on facts that there was no good reason for filing a belated appeal before the Tribunal after the High Court disposed of the writ petition. The reason given was mat the assessee was awaiting the judgment of the High Court. But the facts of the case on hand stand entirely on a different footing and, therefore that decision cannot be pressed into service in this case. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the Tribunal has railed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it and consequently the Order is set aside. The delay is condoned as the reason given by the petitioner is sufficient to condone the delay. The second respondent is directed to restore the appeal on file and dispose of the same on merits in accordance with law. The writ petition is allowed. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 87 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Rate of duty - Customs ... ... ... ... ..... ed that in view of the assurance given by the customs authorities that the same import general manifest can be used. on return of the vessel, the shipping company changed its position and it is therefore not open for the customs authorities to claim that the higher rate of duty will be recovered. We find considerable merit in the submission of the learned counsel. Shri Devdhar could not explain as to why the Assistant Collector of Customs permitted the shipping company to overcarry 2280 tons of imported cargo to Madras, Haldia and Calcutta with the promise that the same could be brought back to Bombay within two months time with the same import general manifest. This promise on the part of the customs authorities disentitled the appellants from demanding higher rate of duty in December 1982. For this reason, we are inclined to uphold the order passed by the learned single Judge, and the appeal must fail. 4. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 85 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dutiability - Cigarette packets and outershells and inner slides ... ... ... ... ..... subjected to any separate assessment. Whatever it may be there is absolutely nothing to show that the outer shells are to be called thus as packets and liable to Excise Duty. Hence, there is no difficulty in finding point No. in favour of the petitioner and against the revenue. 3. Though in our case, the tariff item differs, the issue is identical. It cannot be denied that the ratio laid down in the said judgment of K.M. Natarajan, J. on all fours is applicable to the issue raised in this writ petition. However, Mr. K. Jayachandran, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel submits that writ appeals have been filed against the judgment of K.M. Natarajan, J. and the same are pending. It is not in dispute that against the judgment in W.P. 997 etc. of 1983 1992 (58) E.L.T. 418 (Mad.) no stay has been obtained in the writ appeals. Therefore, applying the ratio laid down in the abovesaid judgment, the impugned order is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. No costs.
....
|
