|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 547 Records
-
1997 (12) TMI 630 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... st part of C forms to be filled up by the issuing authority in indelible ink, so that the obliteration process, if resorted to, would be difficult, if not impossible. For the particulars to be furnished by the purchasing dealer in the certificate the purchasing dealer alone would be liable either by way of prosecution under section 10 of CSTA or by way of mulcting of penalty, in lieu of prosecution under section 10-A of CSTA. 18.. A fraud had been perpetrated in the instant cases, in the sense of misuse of C forms belonging to other dealers as those C forms had been issued to the purchasing dealers by the issuing authorities, without filing various columns in the first part of C forms. 19.. In fine, all the tax case (revisions) are allowed, the orders of the tax authorities, inclusive of the Tribunal below are set aside and all the matters are remitted back to the assessing officer for a fresh look in the matter, in the manner, as indicated above. No costs. Petition allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 629 - SUPREME COURT
Whether company or association of persons or body corporate can be a complainant as per the new Code as for all practical purposes?
Held that:- The complainant must be a corporeal person who is capable of making physical presence in the court. Its corollary is that even if a complaint is made in the name of an incorporeal person (like a company or corporation) it is necessary that a natural person represents such juristic person in the court and it is that natural person who is looked upon, for all practical purposes to be the complainant in the case. In other words, when the component to a body corporate it is the de jure complainant, and it must necessarily associate a human being as de facto complainant to represent the former in court proceedings.
Be that so, we suggest as a pragmatic proposition that no magistrate shall insist that the particular person, whose statement was taken on oath at the first instance, alone can continue to represent the company till the end of the proceedings. There e may be occasions when a different person can represent the company e.g. the particular person who represents the company at the first instance may either retire for, the company's service or may otherwise cease to associate therewith or he would be transferred to a distant place. In such cases it would be practically difficult for the company to continue to make the same person represent the company in the court . In any such eventuality it is open to the de jure complainant company to seek permission of the court for sending any other person to represent the company in the court. At any rate
For those reasons we are not persuaded to uphold the contention that Section 247 of the old Code (or Section 256 of the new Code) is not applicable in a case where the complainant is a company or any other justice person. However, as we have taken the view that the magistrate should not have acquitted the respondent under Section 247 of the old Code on the facts of this case we allow the appeal and set aside the order of acquittal as well as the impugned judgment of the High Court. The prosecution would now proceed from the stage where it reached before the order of acquittal was passed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 628 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ted in favour of the petitioner, the same could be withdrawn, if at all, after notice to the petitioner and communicating the grounds on which the certificate was sought to be withdrawn. If this procedure had been adopted, the petitioner may have satisfied the authority that the ground does not exist for withdrawing the eligibility certificate. By withdrawal of the eligibility certificate, the rights of the petitioner have been affected as in the absence of the eligibility certificate, the petitioner is required to pay sales tax which it otherwise, was not liable to pay. In that view of the matter, orders, annexures P1 and P-5 are quashed. The writ petition is allowed, but with no order as to costs. It is, however, clarified that it will be open to the respondent-authority to proceed with the matter afresh in accordance with law after serving a notice on the petitioner and affording it an opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken. Petition allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 627 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... orm XIV, but in substance it contained the matters which such a notice must contain, we may not have taken the view that we have taken, because in that event it would have been merely a matter of form and not of substance. Since the notices issued to the petitioner did not contain the matters which ought to be contained in a valid notice, such as the satisfaction of the prescribed authority, the purpose for which the notice is issued, the provision of law under which the action is contemplated, it is not possible for us to hold that the notices served upon the petitioner were valid notices. In the absence of a valid notice, a proceeding under section 19(1) of the Act could not be initiated. 13.. In the result, the notices (annexures 1, 2 and 3) are quashed. Consequently, the proceeding initiated under section 19(1) as also the reassessment order dated September 25, 1997, which is annexure 5, is also quashed. 14.. This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. Petition allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 626 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... otification of July 19, 1995 in which directions were given that in a situation where the Anti-Evasion Wing made a case for the recovery of tax at a rate different from the tax paid by the dealer the case was to be transferred to the AA having the normal jurisdiction over the assessee for final disposal. 13.. Therefore, the CTO (AE) had no authority to finalise the matter in hand. The assessment orders made by him being without jurisdiction are ab initio null and void and are therefore set aside. The concerned files be transferred to the CTO, Circle-B, Bikaner for determining the matter de novo in accordance with law independently on merits. Any remark made by the Additional Commissioner, AntiEvasion in his impugned order dated October 6, 1997 or the comments of the CTO (AE) referred to by the Additional Commissioner, Anti-Evasion shall not be read. 14.. The instant application stands disposed of accordingly. We make no order as to costs. Application disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (12) TMI 625 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f the assessing authority to determine whether the penalty provisions under section 22(2) of the Act are attracted in a case even where collections have been made in violation of section 22(1) of the Act and that the imposition of penalty is not automatic. The learned single Judge found on facts of the case that the first respondent had not exercised its statutory discretion as a quasi-judicial authority in a judicious and proper manner. In our view, the learned single Judge was right in that regard. When the petitioners passed on the tax collected to the respondents, that too in a situation when collection of tax was doubtful, it cannot be said that the first respondent exercised its statutory discretion in a judicious and proper manner. 5.. In this view, no fault can be found with the order of the learned single Judge. Finding no fault or good ground to interfere with the order under appeal, we dismiss the writ appeal, but, with no order as to costs. Writ appeal dismissed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 624 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cially the question of liability of the petitioner to pay tax being under consideration in the pending appeal, we direct the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner that appeal of the petitioner shall be heard on its own merits provided it deposits a sum of rupees one lakh within one month from today and furnishes a proof to the Appellate Authority in that behalf, i.e., to the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner. In the event of the amount being deposited, the appeal pending before the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner shall be entertained and disposed of on its own merits in accordance with law. Since we have directed the assessee to deposit a sum of rupees one lakh as a condition precedent for hearing the appeal on merits by the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner, the appeal of the petitioner pending before the Sales Tax Tribunal has been rendered infructuous. 5.. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (12) TMI 623 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n (34) of section 2 eliminate the doubt. Whether in fact a sale has taken place or not are to be determined on the evaluation of the fact by the assessing authority. The guideline issued by the Commissioner was strictly in conformity with the amended clause. The Commissioner, in clear term stated that there is no bar for levying tax in respect of containers sold with the exempted goods where the containers are also sold with the exempted goods whether in fact sale took place or not is a pure question of fact which is to be determined by the authority on the basis of the facts. The Commissioner directed the Superintendent to proceed to levy tax accordingly and apply its mind on its merit and dispose of the matter. Apparently no infirmity can be found in the instruction. The assessing authority is to make assessment strictly in terms of the provision contained in the Act. Subject to the observation made above the writ petition stands disposed. Petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (12) TMI 622 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... uld, of course, claim that the inter-State sale transactions effected by him between April 1, 1988 and October 6, 1988 and between October 7, 1988 and March 31, 1989 would amount to in quantified sums of money. He had also calculated the quantified sums. It is not possible for us at this stage to state whether the quantification of the amounts would really reflect the reality of the situation. 17.. In that view of the matter, what we feel as the better course to be adopted, is to remit the matter to the assessing officer for the determination of the turnover of inter-State sales between the two periods as stated above and accordingly grant exemption to the turnover of inter-State sales between the period April, 1, 1988 to October 6, 1988 and tax the turnover between October 7, 1988 and March 31, 1989 at the appropriate rate depending upon the production or non-production of C forms. 18.. The tax case (revision) is thus disposed of. No costs. Petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (12) TMI 621 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... n of the goods so greatly varied from the valuation appearing in the documents of the applicant it was necessary to give adequate reasons for such assessment. Accordingly, the valuation arrived at by the C.T.O. cannot be accepted. We have already observed that it is a fit case where it cannot be said that the applicant-concern acted bona fide. Hence, in our opinion, the ends of justice would be met if the penalty is fixed at Rs. 2,00,000. 14.. In the result, the application is allowed only in part. The impugned seizure dated December 14, 1994 is declared valid but the penalty amount is reduced to Rs. 2,00,000. Out of the amount of Rs. 3,50,000 as is stated to have been deposited towards payment of penalty, Rs. 2,00,000 shall be adjusted against payment of the penalty and the balance amount of Rs. 1,50,000 be refunded to the applicants, in terms of section 12 of the 1941 Act. We make no order as to costs. M.K. Kar Gupta (Technical Member).-I agree. Application partly allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 620 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on all fours with the factual matrix in T.C. (R) Nos. 642 and 966 of 1995. 29.. For the reasons given above, the common order of the Tribunal pertaining to matters covered by T.C. (R) Nos. 642 and 966 of 1995 deserves to be set aside and the orders of the AAC require to be restored. The common order of the Tribunal relatable to the tax case petitions, viz., T.C. (R) Nos. 648, 683, 701, 702, 706 to 709, 748, 799, 800 and 968 of 1995 also deserves to be set aside and remitted back to the Tribunal for consideration afresh. 30.. In fine, the common order of the Tribunal relatable to matters covered by T.C. (R) Nos. 642 and 966 of 1995 is set aside restoring the order of the AAC. Further, the common order of the Tribunal relatable to T.C. (R) Nos. 648, 683, 701, 702, 706 to 709, 748, 799, 800 and 968 of 1995 is also set aside and all these matters are remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh look and disposal in accordance with law. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (12) TMI 619 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... wever, state at this juncture that the AAC has properly applied his mind to the decisions of the Madhya Pradesh High Court saying that those decisions are relatable to the assessment years prior to the substitution of sub-section (2) of section 6 by Act No. 61 of 1972 with effect from April 1, 1973. The Tribunal, in the view it had taken, did not conform to the view of the assessing officer relatable to the transactions in question. We are sorry to state that this sort of a view, as taken by the AAC, has not at all been given any sort of a consideration by the Tribunal, while penning down the order. 19.. For the reasons as above, the order of the Tribunal cannot at all be stated to be sustainable in law, and the same deserves to be set aside. 20.. In fine, the tax case (revision) is allowed the order of the Tribunal is set aside and the order of AAC confirming the order of the assessing officer relatable to the transactions in question shall stand restored. Petition allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 618 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ng of secured goods is not incidental or main business of the bank. When it is found that the banks are prohibited from trading in goods it cannot be said that trading in goods is the main business. Hence, it cannot be said that the sale of goods for the purpose of realisation of debts due to the scheduled bank is concerned with the business in goods. Hence, the judgment of the learned single Judge is set aside. The writ appeals are allowed. The respondents are restrained from levying any tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act or taking any proceeding under the said Act against the appellants-banks with respect to the disposal of gold ornaments pledged to the banks by the borrowers. Order on C.M.P. No. 1814 of 1997 in W.A. No. 633 of 1997 dismissed. Order on C.M.P. No. 1813 of 1997 in W.A. No. 634 of 1997 dismissed. Order on C.M.P. No. 1963 of 1997 in W.A. No. 693 of 1997 dismissed. Order on C.M.P. No. 2032 of 1997 in W.A. No. 717 of 1997 dismissed. Writ appeals allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 617 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... getable oil. There is no dispute that oxidised vegetable oil is not a goods specified in Schedule IV to the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 hence no sales tax permit is required for importation thereof. 10.. That being the position, the seizure was illegal and invalid and the order of penalty passed by the Commercial Tax Officer of the Chichira checkpost and the orders of the revisional authority confirming the same, namely, the Assistant and Deputy Commissioners, are all liable to be set aside. 11.. In the result, the application is allowed. The seizure of the goods in question on March 3, 1996, the order of penalty passed by respondent No. 2 and the revisional orders therefrom passed by respondents 3 and 4, are all set aside. Respondents, particularly respondent No. 2 is directed to refund the sum of Rs. 14,000 to the applicant, if already paid, within eight weeks from now. The main application is thus finally disposed of. We make no order as to costs. Application allowed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 616 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... preferred an appeal which is impugned in the present revision. 2.. The Tribunal held that the appellant acted on behalf of the house-holders as dealer. House-holders are not dealers within the meaning of the Act. Therefore, assessee who is acting on behalf of the principal is not liable to pay any tax as the principals themselves are not liable to pay any tax. In that view of the matter the appeal is allowed. 3.. We do not find any reason to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal, as no question of law arises from out of the order of the Tribunal. Hence, the tax revision case is dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 615 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ptly submitted to this Court for its satisfaction that the concerned authorities have not failed to perform their legal obligations and have reasonably come to such conclusion. No such report having been submitted by the CBI or any other agency till now in this Court, action on such a report by this Court would be considered, if any when that occasion arises. We also direct that no settlement should be arrived at nor any offence compounded by any authority without prior leave of this Court. We may add that on account of the great public interest involved in this matter, the CBI and other Government agencies must expedite their action to complete the task and prevent pendency of this matter beyond the period necessary. It is needless to observe that the results achieved so far do not match the available time and opportunity for a full investigation ever since the matter came to light. It is of utmost national significance that no further time is lost in completion of the task.
-
1997 (12) TMI 614 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ee. A person who seeks to relieve itself from the liability of the tax imposed by law is required to prove and establish the necessary ingredients of exonerating itself from the burden of tax. In the case of any doubt the benefit will go to the State since it represents the public interest. Section 10 of the Act lends support to the view subscribed. Whether a seller charged the value of a container used in packing materials is a pure question of fact and the same cannot be left to be determined by assumption and presumption. The Legislature by introducing the explanation added a legal fiction. The decision in Raj Sheel 1989 74 STC 379 (SC) followed in Vasavadatta Cements 1996 101 STC 168 (SC) does not come to any assistance to the petitioners. On overall consideration of all the aspects of the matter, I do not find any merit in this petition and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. The interim direction dated 10th March, 1997 stands dissolved. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 613 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s scrap and the Tribunal was fully justified in its finding that they were sold as scrap. After taking into consideration the nature of the articles and the manner in which they were sold, the Tribunal has entered a finding that both the seller and buyer treated them as condemned articles and not as articles which could be put to use again. We do not find any reason to take a different view on such a finding on fact. If that be so, direction given by the Tribunal to levy tax at the rates applicable to scrap is only to be upheld. 44.. In the light of the above discussion, we hold that there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal in the common order under challenge in these tax revision cases. Since the Tribunal had found that concessional rate of tax is applicable only till November, 1990, T.R.C. Nos. 44 and 48 of 1995 relating to the months of November and December, 1990 do not survive. All the other tax revision cases are dismissed. Petitions dismissed.
-
1997 (12) TMI 612 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... collected separately on the sale thereof. The distinction sought to be made later between different shipping companies on the basis of registration, in our opinion, is not tenable in law. It is well-settled that the liability to pay tax is not dependent on registration under the Act. If a transaction of sale or purchase by any person is liable to tax under the provisions of the Act, tax would be leviable irrespective of whether he is registered under the Act or not. 9. In view of the above, we are of the clear opinion that no tax can be levied on the sale of ship, which was a capital asset in the hands of the assessee, made prior to August 16, 1985. In these premises, we answer question No. 3 in the negative and in favour of the assessee. In view of the above answer to question No. 3, the other three questions have become academic. They are, therefore, returned unanswered. The reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. Reference disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (12) TMI 611 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... isition made in this behalf on the address given by them, within two weeks from the date of receipt of assessment order. (3) The petitioners may within a month thereafter file appeals together with the xerox copies of assessment orders. Such appeals shall not be rejected for the reason that the appeal memorandum is not accompanied by the original or authenticated copy of the assessment order or on the ground that the petitioners were not parties to the assessment. (4) If the competent appellate authority or Tribunal finds that there is no liability to pay tax on the disputed transactions, the amount of tax paid to the Sales Tax Department by the Forest Development Corporation should be refunded to the petitioners within three months from the date of the order declaring such non-liability. 10.. The writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. Three weeks time is granted for payment of the balance amount due towards sales tax. Writ petitions disposed of accordingly.
........
|
