|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 465 Records
-
1997 (2) TMI 499
... ...
... ... ..... e and it is even conceded position that the goods remaining in stock, i.e., bricks that were still there even after cancellation of the registration, were not saleable. In so far as coal is concerned, the same was used in manufacturing bricks and the stock of bricks, as mentioned above, could not be sold. There was, thus, no question of applicability of section 10 of the 1973 Act with regard to products manufactured from the goods that were purchased by an assessee. That apart, to include in its ambit and sweep the products manufactured from such goods would be unduly constraining the language of the statute which is not permissible. The first question, referred by the Tribunal is, thus, answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Inasmuch as answer to the second question is dependent upon the answer to first question, the said question is also answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Disposed of accordingly. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1997 (2) TMI 498
... ...
... ... ..... ssessment, i.e., December 30, 1974 to March 31, 1975. What has to be seen by the Board at the time of issuing of certificate after the filing of the application by the assessee-firm is that it (assessee-firm) is genuine and it worked as a co-operative industrial society during the period mentioned in the certificate. But the Board cannot certify about its genuineness and working as a co-operative society for the period yet to come, or in other words for the period subsequent to the date of issuing of the certificate of exemption. Therefore, the exemption certificate issued under section 13 of the Act would become retrospective from the date a genuineness certificate was issued by the Board for the period November 1, 1973 to March 31, 1976 and the assessee-firm would not be liable to pay sales tax and penalty imposed under section 29 of the Act. Consequently, the question referred to this Court for opinion is answered in the affirmative. Reference answered in the affirmative.
-
1997 (2) TMI 497
... ...
... ... ..... ounsel is that even if the land is deemed to be belonging to the partners, only the value of their share will be taken into account and that falls short of Rs. 3 lakhs. Assuming but not accepting that the value of the land on which the unit has been set up is only Rs. 2,25,000 as argued by the Standing Counsel, the value of the investment made in the building and plant and machinery has to be added to that. As per the order of the Commissioner himself, the investment made in the building comes to Rs. 74,285 and besides that investment made in the plant and machinery comes to Rs. 55,341 aggregating to Rs. 1,29,626. If this investment of Rs. 1,29,626 is added to Rs. 2,25,000 representing the total value of the share of the three partners, then the investment exceeds Rs. 3 lakhs and, therefore, the order passed by the Commissioner, Trade Tax, under section 4-A(3) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act is bad in law. For these reasons, the revision fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1997 (2) TMI 496
... ...
... ... ..... he assessment year 1993-94, determining a tax of Rs. 58,389 and the notice of demand dated August 1, 1995, demanding the said tax and also the notice of demand dated August 1, 1995, demanding an interest of Rs. 21,020 under section 26E of the Act of 1944 are quashed. The appeal or appeals filed by the applicant against such assessment and demands shall be disposed of on the basis of this judgment. Respondent No. 2, Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Jalpaiguri Range, is directed to make fresh assessment and demands according to law in respect of tax and interest, if any, for the assessment year 199394 and for the subsequent years. If, in terms of the interim order dated February 9, 1996, the applicant deposited a sum equivalent to not less than fifty per cent. of the assessed tax, the said amount shall abide fresh assessment or assessments. The interim order dated February 9, 1996, stands vacated. The main application is, thus, finally disposed of without any order as to costs.
-
1997 (2) TMI 495
... ...
... ... ..... m of the view that the Commissioner of Income-tax has clearly pointed out an error in the assessment order and at the same time, rightly left the issue open for being decided by the Assessing Officer while redoing the assessment after applying his mind to all the arguments and evidence that might be adduced by the assessee in support of its stand. The description of the issue as debatable only indicates that the Revenue did not have a closed mind and does not, to my mind, detract from the correctness of the action taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax. The decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gabriel India Ltd. 1993 203 ITR 108 (Bom), to my mind, supports the action taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax. In the above view of the matter, I agree with the learned Accountant Member and I would uphold the order of the Commissioner of Incometax under section 263. The matter will now go back to the regular Bench for a decision, according to majority opinion.
-
1997 (2) TMI 494
... ...
... ... ..... lanation would clarify the intent of the section but, the above two divergent views of the Bombay High Court go to show that, the law makers belief has been shaken.In conclusion because the Division Benches of the Mumbai High Court had given two views that are diametrically opposite to one another and neither of them could be said to have overruled the other for overruling of a decision of a Division Bench is possible by a Full Bench of three or more judges of the said High Court and implementation of the provision being not free from doubt though, the intention is to restrict the expenses on guest-houses, I find that I am left with no alternative but to resort to the Supreme Court decision in CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. 1973 88 ITR 192 and choose the view that is favourable to the subject. On this reasoning, I agree with the view of the Accountant Member. Now the matter would go back to the regular Bench for disposal of the appeals in accordance with the view of majority.
-
1997 (2) TMI 493
Held that: where imports were effected by an agent on behalf of the actual user against an actual user's import licence on the strength of letters of authority, the sales by the agent were sales in the course of import; that where pursuant to the acceptance of tenders by the Director-General of Supplies and Disposals and orders placed by him, goods were imported, there would be two sales: one by the foreign seller to the Indian dealer (importer) and the other by the Indian dealer to the ultimate consignee, and the second of these sales could not be considered a sale in the course of import.
-
1997 (2) TMI 492
Classification of goods - Misdescription - Burden to prove - Flats - M.S. flats - Edge grooving - Demand - Limitation - Suppression
-
1997 (2) TMI 491
Export - Advance licence - Redemption fine and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, thus rendering the goods liable to confiscation under that Act. By the same token the goods have been rightly held liable for confiscation under Section 113(d) of Customs Act and the appellants for a penalty under Section 114(i) thereof. The order of confiscation and penalty is hence upheld. A plea has been made that the goods are not prohibited for export and that the level of fine and penalty is very high. We feel that this aspect has to be given due consideration, especially as the Commissioner has already decided that on export of the goods on redemption, the appellants will not be entitled to D.E.E.C. benefits for the consignments in question. The fine on the goods is accordingly reduced from Rs. 8 lakhs to 4 lakhs (Rupees Four lakhs only) and the penalty on the appellants is reduced from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 2 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs only). The Commissioner rsquo s order is modified only to this extent. It is otherwise upheld.
-
1997 (2) TMI 490
EXIM Policy - Licence - Validity period - Extension of ... ... ... ... ..... he licensing authority on this aspect. See Handicrafts and Textiles Industries and Another v. The Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, 54 (1994) DLT 5, G.F. Kellner and Company Ltd. v. Director General of Foreign Trade and Another, C.W. 931/95, decided on 8th November, 1995 - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 437 (Del.) and Cosmique Exports Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. Union of India and Others, C.W.P. 2486/89, decided on 9th July, 1990 . 5. emsp The sole ground for refusing extension/revalidation is lack of power. In view of our conclusion that such a power exists. We make the rule absolute, quash the impugned letter dated 16th August, 1996 and direct the Respondent No. 2 to forthwith and in any case not later than four weeks from today consider and decide the representation of the petitioner on merit seeking revalidation/extension of the period of the validity of the licence, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
-
1997 (2) TMI 487
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on inputs - Words and Phrases - Tools ... ... ... ... ..... ld in hand for working upon something such as lathe or thing used in an occupation or pursuit such as literary tools, computer etc. According to Chambers English Dictionary, tool is a working instrument, especially one used by hand such as cutting part of a machine tool or a weapon. According to Webster rsquo s 9th New Collegiate Dictionary, tool is an instrument (as a hammer) used or worked by hand, the cutting or shaping part in a machine or machine tool. The lower authorities have not cared to explain why they regarded these articles as tools. The disputed articles are used in the functioning of certain machines and do not fall under any of the descriptions in any of definitions. In the absence of better material collected on the question, there is no justification to hold that the disputed articles are tools attracting exclusion clause (i) of Explanation to Rule 57A of the Rules. 5. emsp For the reasons indicated above, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1997 (2) TMI 479
Whether stay-wires could not be said to be accessories within the meaning of item 26 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The High Court said that, at most, the stay wires could be said to be accessories of the electric poles which they supported, but electric posts were not electrical goods so that the stay wires were not accessories of electrical goods. The view taken by the High Court is, in our opinion, eminently reasonable and requires no interference.
-
1997 (2) TMI 474
Whether agarbathis were liable to sales tax under item No. 36 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. We are of the view that the High Courts of Kerala, Bombay and Punjab and Haryana were right in not giving an expanded meaning to “perfume” or “perfumery” and the Orissa High Court was in error in including agarbathis within the definition of “perfumery”.
In our judgment neither in common parlance nor by the dictionary meaning nor having regard to the context of item 36 of the First Schedule of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act can it be said that “perfumes” would include agarbathis for the purpose of imposition of sales tax. In view of the aforesaid, the judgment under appeal dated September 29, 1989 is set aside.
-
1997 (2) TMI 467
Whether sales tax is payable on the khalli for the period 26th December, 1977 till June, 1985?
Legality of a notification issued by the State Government on 31st December, 1980 in exercise of the powers conferred by section 20-A of the Bihar Sales Tax Third Ordinance, 1980 as amended?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. It would appear that a point that goes to the root of the matter has been overlooked and that is that it has first to be found as a matter of fact that khalli falls outside the limited description of cattle feed that is to be found in the said explanation and this is something that has not been done. We find it too late in the day to remand the matter for such a finding and, therefore, must reject the appeal in so far as it relates to this point without referring to any of the other contentions that have been raised on behalf of the respondents.
Having regard to the terms in which the notification has been worded, we are inclined to agree. The notification does not permit the dealer only "to adjust the amount of tax paid within Bihar on the purchase of raw materials". It permits him "to adjust the amount of tax paid on the purchase of raw materials. There is no limitation which calls for adjustment only if tax has been paid in Bihar on the purchase of raw materials
-
1997 (2) TMI 460
Whether respondents who sold wheat bran are liable to pay sales tax thereon during the period December 26, 1977 until June, 1985?
Whether, by reason of the Notification No. 3320 dated March 9, 1978, amending the entry relating to the rate of tax in the earlier notification in that behalf by including “bran” therein, has the effect of bringing to an end the exemption from the levy of sales tax that bran enjoyed under Notification No. 14547 dated December 26, 1977?
Held that:- The respondent would be liable to pay sales tax on its sales of bran at the rate of 3 per cent from March 9, 1978 until June, 1985 when the situation was radically altered.
-
1997 (2) TMI 451
Whether it is an inter-State sale taxable in the State of Andhra Pradesh or whether it is an intra-State sale in the other State where the goods are delivered?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. If the assessing authorities decide against the appellant, it shall be open to them to file appeal(s) before the Tribunal directly. If and when the Tribunal decides against the appellant, it shall be open to the appellant to approach this Court for appropriate directions. In the circumstances of the case, it is further directed that in case the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the transactions in question are inter-State sales upon which Central sales tax is leviable in the State of Tamil Nadu, the State of Tamil Nadu shall not enforce their demand for a period of eight weeks from the date of the decision of the Tribunal. Further, till the issue is decided by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, no Central sales tax shall be demanded from the appellant, provided it is established by the appellant that in respect of the same transaction, the appellant has paid tax in another State treating it as an intra-State sale in that other State.
-
1997 (2) TMI 447
Sales tax on exercise books - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The High Court was right in holding that exempting the exercise books produced in the State and subjecting the exercise books produced outside the State but sold in Uttar Pradesh to sales tax at 5 per cent is discriminatory and, therefore, offends clause (a) of article 304.
-
1997 (2) TMI 434
Board -Functions/Powers of ... ... ... ... ..... ansactions for squaring up the outstanding transactions under its procedure and to use for any other purposes and that the orders also suffer from breach of principles of natural justice which results in making them void ah initio. Consequently, the orders cannot be sustained. Relief in the present circumstances cannot be denied on principles of unjust enrichment. 279. In view of the aforesaid conclusions, merits of other contentions about validity of impugned orders need not be examined. 280. As a result, the petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 4-7-1996 in Special Civil Application No. 2224 of 1996 and orders dated 25-1-1996 in Special Civil Application No. 5483 of 1996 made by the Board as affirmed by the Central Government by its order 22-5-1996 are quashed, to the extent they direct impounding of the monies recovered by the respective Stock Exchanges on the closing transactions. 281. Rule made absolute accordingly in each case. No costs. SCL q FEBRUARY 5, 1998
-
1997 (2) TMI 433
Powers of court to grant relief in certain cases ... ... ... ... ..... bmit the annual return, balance-sheet and annual statement of profit and loss accounts along with late fees as per the provision of the Companies Act against which no grievance should be made. Another aspect of the matter is that as indicated above, the petitioners basically seek protection from anticipated prosecution. Section 633, however, envisages a proceeding in which the civil liability of the defaulting officer is to be determined. It does not refer to any criminal proceeding. The High Court under this provision has power to relieve the officer from his civil liability only. I may in this connection notice the other submission of Mr. Mandal to the effect that the impugned notice was issued to the petitioners more than 13 years ago in 1983 but till today no prosecution has been launched. He stated that the petitioners may even now submit the returns, etc., along with late fine as per the provisions of the Companies Act. In the above premises, this petition is dismissed.
-
1997 (2) TMI 432
Audit of cost accounts in certain cases ... ... ... ... ..... o formal reply was given. As contended by Mr. Ravi, as the lock-out continued till April 16, 1994 and as the matter was pending till then before the BIFR, the reasons that are applicable to the exemption for the earlier years, apply to this year also, Thus, the company cannot be said to be guilty of non-compliance of the order directing cost audit in respect of chemicals for the years 1990-91, 1992-93 and 1993-94 and consequently, the petitioner who was former secretary is entitled to claim relief. As regards the year 1994-95, as already seen, there was no lock-out. Even assuming without deciding, that the company has violated section 233B of the Act for this year, the petitioner cannot be said to be guilty, as he has admittedly resigned as company secretary with effect from February 16, 1994, and he was not company secretary during this period, i.e., commencing from April 1, 1994. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to succeed and accordingly, the petition is allowed. No costs.
............
|
