|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 217 Records
-
1993 (11) TMI 212
... ...
... ... ..... ority was justified in rectifying the orders of assessment by including the packing charges in the taxable turnover. 32.. I, therefore, hold that the orders of rectification impugned in these writ petitions, in so far as they seek to include packing charges in the taxable turnover are valid and justified. If the petitioner has any other grievance in regard to the orders of rectification, on the calculations made in pursuance of the rectification, it is open to them to urge that limited question in the appeals filed or to be filed by them. 33.. It is stated that the petitioner has not filed appeals in regard to assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 having regard to the pendency of these petitions. It is needless to say that if such appeals are filed, the appellate authority will have to take note of the time spent in these writ petitions and condone the delay in filing such appeals. Subject to the above observations, these writ petitions are rejected. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 211
... ...
... ... ..... nnot be considered that other items for which notification has been issued earlier has also been superseded. There may be express supersession or implied supersession. Even the implied supersession cannot be considered in the present case as the item under notification dated September 8, 1976, has specifically mentioned by name of goods without saying that the same are pulses. In these circumstances, raajma which is a pulse is liable to tax at 2 per cent in accordance with notification dated May 19, 1972, unless the said notification is superseded. The notification dated May 19, 1972 shall not be applicable to the items which are specified in the notification dated September 8, 1976. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Sales Tax Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the rate of tax on raajma is 2 per cent in accordance with the notification dated May 19, 1972. The revision petition has no force. It is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 210
... ...
... ... ..... hat whether the twisted silk is manufactured out of tax suffered raw silk or otherwise. Said clarification to the extent it is opposed to the scope of explanation VIII in question as explained in this order, is declared as illegal and ultra vires and therefore unenforceable. In the result, I make the following order (i) It is declared that explanation VIII to the Second Schedule to the Act shall be read as conveying the following meaning Where tax has been levied under this Act in respect of raw silk referred to in SI. No. 7 of the Third Schedule, and out of such raw silk, silk yarn is manufactured, no tax of whatever kind leviable under this Act shall be levied on such silk yarn to the extent it is manufactured out of such raw silk. (ii) The impugned notices and orders in these writ petitions are quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh according to law. The petitions are accordingly allowed. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 209
... ...
... ... ..... , issuance of demand as a consequence thereof was wholly unjustified, in the face of the interim order dated March 22, 1988, whereby this Court had stayed further proceedings pursuance to annexure E (i.e., the proposition notice). Further proceedings would include the issuance of demand notice also. Since the petitioners had no adequate opportunity to show cause against the proposition notice, the assessment order and the demand issued thereafter, are liable to be set aside, as made in violation of the principles of natural justice. In the result, for the reasons stated above, this petition is allowed and the impugned order and notice (annexures J and H ) are set aside. Petitioners are granted four weeks time from the date of the receipt of this order, to show cause against the proposition notice, which shall be considered by the second respondent and pass appropriate orders according to law, after hearing the petitioners. Rule made absolute. No costs. Writ petition allowed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 208
... ...
... ... ..... dance with law and is set aside. Since the arguments of the assessee were not heard on merits the matter is sent back to the Sales Tax Tribunal for deciding the case on merits. It may also be observed that in the case of Mansa Ram v. J.S. Rajyana, Excise and Taxation Officer 1966 18 STC 57 it has been held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court that once a Sales Tax Officer issues a notice and returns are filed before him in pursuance of the said notice and he is then seized of the matter, no other sales tax authority even if he has inherent jurisdiction, can proceed with the assessment on the basis of those returns without first obtaining a formal order of transfer of the case from the Commissioner. 5.. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The order of the Tribunal dated March 6, 1990, is set aside and the case is remanded back to the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal for deciding the matter afresh in accordance with law after hearing both the parties. Petition allowed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 207
... ...
... ... ..... ision on merit after hearing the parties. So far as C.W.P. No. 8863 of 1991 is concerned, the order passed by the Tribunal on May 13, 1991, is also on record as annexure P-3. In view of the fact that the case is being remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits, it would be in the fitness of things that the parties are given a chance to make their respective submissions. Otherwise the possibility of contradictory findings cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case, the two civil writ petitions are allowed and the case is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision. In view of the above, the learned counsel for the parties agree that the two sales tax cases have become infructuous and no case for interference exists. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed and the sales tax cases are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 206
... ...
... ... ..... ed turnover. But, in second appeal, the Appellate Tribunal held that the addition of 1 frac12 times of the actual suppression detected will be justified. The Appellate Tribunal found that the assessing authority had not established any instance of purchase from outside the State. In a case where the rejection of accounts and returns was warranted, the only question is the quantum of estimate to be made to the returned turnover. As a final fact-finding authority, the Tribunal has limited the addition to 1 frac12 times the suppressed turnover and exempted 80 per cent of the same. We are of the view that the estimate sustained by the Appellate Tribunal is only very minimal and no error in law has been committed by the Appellate Tribunal in sustaining the estimate to 1 frac12 times the suppression detected and in exempting 80 per cent of the addition. 4.. The order of the Appellate Tribunal does not disclose any error of law. We dismiss the tax revision case. Petition dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 205
... ...
... ... ..... een recorded on facts by the competent authorities that an assessee has made a false representation , as contemplated by section 10(b) of the Act, in the absence of an additional finding that the assessee also had the requisite mens rea, he cannot be penalised under section 10(b) of the Act. The argument has no basis and is absolutely far-fetched. Therefore, it is not possible to agree with the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bombay Garage 1984 57 STC 67, as it is not necessary that in a case of tax delinquency mens rea must be established. The obligation on the part of the Revenue in a case of tax delinquency is discharged when the blameworthy conduct of the assessee is proved. Such blameworthy conduct can be held to have been proved if it is found that the assessee had made a false representation and the like. 5.. For the reasons stated above, there is no ground to admit the tax case. It is accordingly rejected. Petition dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 204
... ...
... ... ..... en, in that case inspite of the fact that the initial bill was for the higher sale price, the entire purchases of the said period will be taken into consideration and the discount will have to be allowed, that discount will not form part of the sale price. In respect of cash discount, if a particular seller frames the scheme that the payment of the bill is to be made within three months, but, if the payment is made within two months, then the discount will be X , if the payment is made within a month, then the discount will be Y and if the payment is made in cash, then the discount will be Z . In all these cases the discount which is being given will be considered to be as a cash discount, and this discount has to be deducted from the sale price. Accordingly, I am of the view that the Board of Revenue was right in allowing the discount from the computation of sale price under section 2(h) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The revision is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed
-
1993 (11) TMI 203
... ...
... ... ..... is Court in a hurry, without waiting for the adjudication by the assessing authority. Therefore, we keep open all the contentions raised by the petitioner/appellant and agree with the learned single Judge in holding that this is not a stage, at which interference is called for and dismiss the writ appeals. 7.. However, it is brought to our notice that the last date for filing the objections expires today. On this point, we have heard learned Additional Government Pleader for Taxes. As we have declined to entertain the writ appeals, at this stage, it is just and necessary that the petitioner/appellant should be granted some more time to file the objections. We, accordingly, direct that if the petitioner/ appellant files the objections on or before November 15, 1993, the same shall be taken into consideration, heard and decided in accordance with law. Till then, the assessing authority shall not proceed with the show cause notices. No order as to costs. Writ appeals dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 202
... ...
... ... ..... rovide as against that an estimated amount as a provision for performance guarantee. However, as a Third Member hearing the appeal, I have no jurisdiction to resolve the issue in a manner different from that made by the other two Members. I have perforce to agree either with the learned Judicial Member or with the learned Accountant Member. Keeping in mind the principle of income recognition which is a basis of the mercantile method of accounting, I have to agree with the learned Accountant Member that as long as the performance guarantee remains and is enforceable without notice to the assessee, the income from the retention money cannot be recognised. Consequently, I have to agree with the learned Accountant Member that the retention money of 10 per cent. has to be excluded in computing the total income until the period of guarantee is over. The appeal will now be placed before the Bench for passing an order conformably with the majority of the Members who heard the appeal.
-
1993 (11) TMI 201
Power - Use of power - Togo Tenex - Thermit portion and ferro alloys ... ... ... ... ..... with the aid of power. In this view of the matter, we are unable to accept the contention that once the pumping of the brine into the salt pans or the lifting of coke and limestone with the aid of power does not bring about any change in the raw-material, the case is not taken out of the Notification. The exemption under the Notification is not available in these cases. Accordingly, we allow these appeals. In the facts and circumstance of the case, we make no order as to costs. rdquo 7. emsp In view of the settled position of law, we hold that in view of the admitted facts that the ingredients are independent duty paid goods and that they are merely mixed manually without the aid of power, the goods lsquo Thermit Powder rsquo and lsquo Ferro Alloys rsquo would be entitled to the benefit of the notification. Whereas, the goods Togo Tenex will not be entitled for the benefit and the assessee has to pay duty thereon. 8. emsp The appeal is thus partly allowed on the above terms.
-
1993 (11) TMI 200
SSI Exemption - Brand name of another - Additional evidence ... ... ... ... ..... en now produced along with the application. These pieces of evidence, which are of relevance, do arise out of the pleadings taken by the appellants in their defence before the lower authorities. However, the lower authorities had no occasion to consider having not been placed before them. Therefore, it is held that it will be in the interest of justice to permit the evidence now sought to be adduced in the present application to be brought on record. It is ordered accordingly. It is also found that factual verification may also be required. Consequently, without prejudice to the merits of the case, the case is remanded to the jurisdictional Assistant Collector with the direction to take the above said evidence on record, evaluate them and then decide afresh the question of eligibility of the appellants to exemption under Notification 175/86 in accordance with law after giving them an opportunity of hearing. The appeals are, therefore, disposed of by remand in the above terms.
-
1993 (11) TMI 199
Notice for meeting, Directors - Power of ... ... ... ... ..... mpany. It has its own facilities for research and development. It can continue to carry on business in India. According to the balance-sheets filed in this court, it has got substantial reserves. If it needs any more capital, the same can be raised by resorting to procedures which are permissible by following the procedures contemplated by the Indian Companies Act. There does not appear to be any loss occasioned to the company as a result of re-constitution of the board of directors by addition of four directors on September 15, 1993, and September 17, 1993. In the aforesaid circumstances, I hold that Mr. Sias has no authority to institute the suit, and as such following the principles laid down in Oberoi Hotels (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Observer Publications (P) Ltd. (Suit No. 469 of 1966, decided on 26th November, 1968) and Nibro Limited v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. 1991 70 Comp. Cas. 388 AIR 1991 Delhi 25, the same is liable to be dismissed. The suit is accordingly dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 198
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... ppeal No. 10 of 1988, decided on January 13, 1992. I have perused the decision of the Division Bench, I am afraid the point at issue before the Division Bench was not the maintainability of the petition on the ground of the running account. However, the present petition is based on the running account which was not the subject-matter before the Division Bench. From the perusal of the judgment of the Division Bench, it can be inferred that this appeal arose against the decision of this court in O.P. No. 191 of 1987. Furthermore, the Supreme Court, in the abovementioned case of Chandradhar Goswami 1967 37 Comp. Cas. 108 (SC), has held in no uncertain words that each entry has to be proved in the books of account and this cannot be done in a summary procedure under section 433 of the Companies Act. This can be gone into in a civil suit. For these reasons the winding up petition is not maintainable. The remedy available with the petitioner is to file a civil suit, if within time.
-
1993 (11) TMI 187
Winding up – Exclusion of certain time in computing periods of limitation ... ... ... ... ..... o 15 of the Limitation Act provide for exclusion of time under certain circumstances. It is well-settled that in applying those provisions, the periods excluded have to be added to the prescribed period (see Maqbul Ahmad v. Onkar Pratap, AIR 1935 PC 85 and Bhagwan Swarup v. Municipal Board, Ujhani, AIR 1970 All 652.) The petition is accordingly held to be within limitation and issue No. 2 is decided against the respondent and in favour of the petitioner. In view of the findings recorded above, I pass an order that a sum of Rs. 16,245 be recovered from the respondent. No evidence has been led regarding the agreed rate of interest. Keeping in view the circumstances of the case and the rate of interest which was prevalent in the year 1983 when the amount was taken by the respondent, I fix the rate of interest at 12 per cent. per annum which the respondent shall pay from the last date of the transaction, i.e., August 6, 1985, till its payment. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 182
Directors - Right of person other than retiring director to stand for directorship, Removal of director
-
1993 (11) TMI 172
Dismissal of frivolous complaints - Appellants claimed relief and compensation for delay in issuing unit certificates of Master-gain-1992 Scheme purchased from UTI - District Forum allowed interest for a specified period - Whether appellants' appeal seeking further raise in quantum of relief had any merit or adequate foundation in absence of meaningful evidence led by them to establish precise quantum of their claim - Held, no
-
1993 (11) TMI 166
Modvat - Waste connotes ... ... ... ... ..... pect of components which also are covered under the MODVAT Scheme. The rules framed under MODVAT Scheme introduced have to be interpreted in a harmonious manner so as to apply to all inputs unless there is a specific provision to the contrary. In this view of the matter we hold that in case an input has been held to be eligible and which is used in the final product and which becomes defective because of the use in conjunction with the final product and by virtue of that use becomes unusable, that has to be treated as waste. In the present case, however, we find that no basis has been laid that these batteries had in fact been used with reference to the vehicles and the learned lower appellate authority has not gone into any evidence in this regard. In view of the above, we hold that the impugned order is not a proper order and therefore has to be set aside and we remand the matter to the learned lower authority for de novo adjudication in the light of our observations above.
-
1993 (11) TMI 165
Demand for wrong availment of Modvat credit - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... w of the above, we hold that the lower authority rsquo s order so far as recovery in respect of Modvat Credit wrongly taken is concerned, the same is maintainable. 9. emsp In regard to the demand for payment by cash or PLA in respect of the cables complete cleared from the appellants rsquo factory we observe that the item was not declared as a finished product under Rule 57G. The appellants could not have paid duty in respect of the same by utilising Modvat Credit taken as payment could have been in cash and clearance of the goods therefore have to be taken to have been made without payment of proper duty. However, since there was no suppression on the part of the appellants as we have held above inasmuch as the authorities had knowledge about the mode of payment of duty, the extended period of limitation under Section 11A cannot be applied for recovery of duty in respect of the same. In view of the above, we find no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and we dismiss the same.
........
|
