|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 286 Records
-
1999 (6) TMI 487
... ...
... ... ..... duty on the imported goods. 17. In the instant case as has been brought out above that the Development Commissioner had reported that the export obligation with the prescribed value addition has not been fulfilled by the appellant. The Board of Approval had reviewed the performance of the appellant unit in terms of para 117 of the Exim Policy 1992-97 and that the applicable Customs and Excise duty would be paid by the unit. Thus, when the export policy findings of the Board of Approval and conditions of the exemption notification are examined together, it becomes very clear that Customs Duty becomes demandable from the appellant unit and therefore, Customs Duty has correctly been demanded in terms of Section 15 of Customs Act, 1962 read with instructions issued on the subject. Goods have rightly been confiscated and we hold accordingly. 18. But for the above modifications, the impugned order is upheld and the appeals are disposed of accordingly. Pronounced today (18.6.1999).
-
1999 (6) TMI 486
... ...
... ... ..... off ₹ 23,665 Blank cassettes taken to current assets ₹ 95,400 Materials consumed debited to P & L A/c ₹ 4,05,358 Total ₹ 10,85,247 It will thus be seen that the Profit and Loss account has properly taken into account the entire closing stock of ₹ 1,08,49,128 which includes within these two items considered by the Assessing Officer for addition, viz. ₹ 17,57,000 being video rights and ₹ 1,21,822 being video rights, English. The addition which has been caused by pure confusion to which both the parties have generously contributed is directed to be deleted. There will be a relief of ₹ 18,78,822." 18. The findings recorded by the CIT(A) have not been rebutted before us by any evidence. We therefore find no justification to interfere in the order of the CIT(A) in this regard. 19. In the result, whereas the appeal of the revenue for assessment year 1986-87 is allowed, the appeal for assessment year 1987-88 is partly allowed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 485
... ...
... ... ..... tion. As far as the submissions of Shri Chaudhary that the petition is otherwise also not maintainable in facts of the allegation, it is to be noted that when we deal with an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, our role is limited to examining whether the subject-matter is covered by an arbitration agreement and not to examine whether the allegations merit consideration or not. This can be done only when the pleadings are completed. 7. In view of our finding that there are allegations in the petition which are independent of the sponsorship agreement, the prayer of the respondents in C. A. No. 87 of 1999, to refer the parties to arbitration and dismiss the petition is rejected. The respondents should file their replies covering all the allegations in the petition other than those at sub-paras. (c) and (f) of para. 2 above by August 1, 1999, and rejoinder, if any, will be filed by September 1, 1999. The petition will be heard on October 18, 1999, at 10.30 a.m.
-
1999 (6) TMI 484
... ...
... ... ..... case of Khandwala Securities Ltd. v. Kowa Spinning Ltd. 1999 97 Comp Cas 632 (CLB) in which also there were allegations in respect of matters covered in a sponsorship agreement covered by an arbitration clause as also matters independent of the agreement, we dismissed the application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, and directed the respondents to file a reply on the allegations which were independent of the sponsorship agreement. 9. In view of our finding that there are allegations in the petition independent of the sponsorship agreement, the prayer of the respondents in C. A. No. 213 of 1998, to refer the parties to arbitration and dismiss the petition is rejected. The respondents should file their replies covering all the allegations in the petition other than those at sub-paras (a), (d), (g), (h) and (j) of para. 2 above by August 1, 1999, and rejoinder, if any, will be filed by September 1, 1999. The petition will be heard on November 1, 1999, at 10.30 a.m.
-
1999 (6) TMI 483
... ...
... ... ..... and Co., Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad (Telephone No. 231740) for determining the value of the shares. The company will negotiate the fees payable to the valuer and bear the same. Both the petitioners and respondents are at liberty to make both oral and written submissions before the valuer who will take such submissions into consideration while arriving at the value of the shares. The valuation report should be submitted on or before October 31, 1999, to the company as well as the petitioner with a copy to this Bench. The valuation made by the valuer will be binding on both the sides. Within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the valuation report, the respondents, on receipt of the shares along with blank transfer forms from the petitioners, pay the consideration for the shares at the rate determined by the valuer. 35. With the above directions, we dispose of the petition, with the liberty to apply in the case of any difficulty in implementing this order.
-
1999 (6) TMI 482
... ...
... ... ..... principle in Morgan v. Tate and Lyle Ltd. 1955 AC 21. I would dismiss the appeal. Lord Mackay of Clashfern. My Lords, I have had the advantage of reading a draft of the speech prepared by my noble and learned friend, Lord Hoffmann. For the reasons he has given I, too, would dismiss this appeal. Lord Clyde. My Lords, I have had the advantage of reading a draft of the speech of my noble and learned friend, Lord Hoffmann. For the reasons he has given I, too, would dismiss this appeal. Lord Hutton. My Lords, I have had the advantage of reading a draft of the speech of my noble and learned friend, Lord Hoffmann. For the reasons he has given I, too, would dismiss this appeal. Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough. My Lords, I have had the advantage of reading a draft of the speech of my noble and learned friend, Lord Hoffmann. For the reasons he has given I, too, would dismiss this appeal. Appeal dismissed with costs. Solicitors Solicitor of Inland Revenue Davis Blank Furniss. Manchester.
-
1999 (6) TMI 481
... ...
... ... ..... thorities could take action under Section 111 (o). In a case like this, the authorities in our view will have to consider action like wise under the Customs Act, 1962. In view of the above discussions inasmuch as we find that there has been no violation of any one of the Central Excise Rules and no case has been made out for denial of the Modvat credit, we are of the view that the learned lower authority's order is sustainable in law. We in the circumstances therefore, dismiss the appeal of the Revenue." 3. In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. reported in 1997 (18) RLT 607, the Bench has arrived at the same conclusion independently, holding that the provision of Import Policy about replenishment material cannot be imported into the Modvat Rules for reversal of modvat credit. Following the ratio of the above decisions which are directly applicable in the present case, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1999 (6) TMI 480
... ...
... ... ..... l in the case of Kerala State Electronic Corporation (supra) it is not open to the Central Excise Officer at the end of the appellants to reassess duty on the inputs received for the purpose of Modvat credit. It was held in Kerala State Electronic Corporation case that if the duty paid on the inputs is found to be short or in excess of what is payable under the law, the resort can be had at the suppliers end under the provisions of Section 11A and 11B of the Central Excise and Salt Act as the case may be by way of demand by the Authority or refund claimed by the supplier....... So far as taking up of Modvat credit at the time of receipt of the goods is concerned the same is permissible to the extent specified in the duty paying document under which goods have been received. Following the ratio of the decisions, the Modvat credit is avaialble to the Appellants in respect of the duty paid on the packing and forwarding charges and accordingly the appeal filed by them is allowed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 479
... ...
... ... ..... e so feels. Learned counsel further expresses an apprehension that even if the appellate authority does not agree with the clarification and agrees with the contention raised by the assessee, the assessing authority would be bound by the clarification issued because of the provisions of section 28-A(3) of the Act. 6.. We do not read any such compulsion and binding nature in that provision. In fact, the assessing authority would certainly be bound only by the appellate order. In the present case, the Tribunal has left that question open before the appellate authority. In that view of the matter, we do not deem it necessary to go into the question of correctness of the clarification issued. That question would depend on the evidence which would be lead by the assessee before the concerned authorities. In that view of the matter, we do not see any merit in this writ petition and it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.M.Ps are dismissed. Petitions dismissed. Here italicised.
-
1999 (6) TMI 478
... ...
... ... ..... x liability. The population is one of the relevant factors, on the basis of which, the amount of anticipatory tax liability is fixed. The State Government cannot examine the case of each and every individual assessee with regard to their liability. In these circumstances, I feel that the notification cannot be considered bad in law. A copy of this order be sent to the Commissioner who may issue a circular to the assessing authorities to inform the Commissioner with regard to monthly payment of tax of each of the liquor dealers for one year and thereafter, the State Government may consider the refixation of the amount of security. If it is found that the security amount is not in accordance with the figures available with the department. This would also ensure the department for prompt realisation of tax dues. Writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. Writ petitions disposed of accordingly. Reported as Unicorn Bar and Restaurant v. State of Karnataka 1999 112 STC 231 (Kar.)
-
1999 (6) TMI 477
... ...
... ... ..... ty to enter into the questions whether Horlicks during the relevant period conformed to the condition laid down in the proviso to the main part of Notification No. 886-F.T. dated May 1, 1955, and what that condition signified. 16.. In the result, the application succeeds. The impugned order of assessment dated June 3, 1997 and order of determination of interest of the same date, the impugned combined appellate order dated February 25, 1998 and the impugned revisional order of the Board dated October 13, 1998 are all set aside. Consequently, the notices of demand or actions taken in consequence of the aforesaid orders are also set aside. The assessing authority is directed to make fresh order of assessment according to law under the 1954 Act for the impugned period of 12 months ending March, 1995 in respect of sales of Horlicks by following the view held by us in this judgment. No order is made for costs. 17.. D. BHATTACHARYYA (Technical Member).-I agree. Application allowed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 476
... ...
... ... ..... y or the other. It is for the appellate authority to examine the relevant documents and record its findings. 12.. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction that if the petitioner files an appeal within a period of 15 days from today, the same shall be entertained and disposed of by the appellate authority on merits without raising any objection as to limitation. It is also open to the petitioner to seek stay pending the appeal. To enable him to do so, we direct that no steps should be taken for recovery of the disputed tax for a period of six weeks. It is needless to observe that the appellate authority is bound to keep in view the clarification of legal position as given in this judgment. The prayer for declaring clause (c) of section 6-A of A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as unconstitutional is rejected. We make no order as to costs. The office shall return the original impugned order. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1999 (6) TMI 475
... ...
... ... ..... exempted item in Schedule I of the Act, 1993 is within the legislative competency of the State and it does not violate the right of the petitioner under articles 14, 19 and 301 of the Constitution as the imposition of the tax on sugar candy does not prejudice the legal or constitutional rights of the petitioner. Further, sugar candy after changing it from sugar by a process is distinct and different item and is prepared by adopting special chemical process and, therefore, there cannot be any objection to include it in taxable item. 14.. The learned Government Advocate has prayed for an exemplary cost stating that realisation of State revenue has been hampered which is the main source of revenue of the State. 15.. In this case no order for realisation of tax by the State has been passed by this Court and, therefore, I direct the parties to bear their own costs. 16.. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. Writ petition dismissed. Reported in 2000 117 STC 32 (Gauhati).
-
1999 (6) TMI 474
... ...
... ... ..... e proposition that there is violation of natural justice and therefore the order of reassessment has to be set aside have no relevance at all. Thus, I find that there is no case to interfere with the order of assessment in writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India when the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of filing statutory appeal against the order of revision passed on March 31, 1999. Thus, reserving the right of filing statutory appeal, this original petition is dismissed. Time spent in pursuing this petition before this Special Tribunal shall be excluded in calculating the time for filing appeal before the statutory appellate authority. Original papers if any filed shall be returned to the petitioner. And this Tribunal doth further order that this order on being produced be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal on the 25th day of June, 1999. Petition dismissed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 473
... ...
... ... ..... ascertained goods at the time of contract of sale or purchase is made. 5.. The goods in the present case were in the State of Karnataka though in the territorial waters which form part of the territory of the State. The question as to whether there was transfer of goods which purely is a question of fact to be decided on the basis of the evidence which may be produced by either side cannot be considered over here. Petitioner has to raise these objections before the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes. A detailed reply may now therefore be filed within a period of four weeks which will be considered by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and appropriate order in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner would be passed. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order he would be free to challenge the same by filing appeal which is an efficacious remedy under the Act. Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. Petition disposed of accordingly.
-
1999 (6) TMI 472
... ...
... ... ..... that the plywood in any other form falls under entry 114 of the Act. It is not in dispute that Novopan doors were prepared out of Novopan plywood using the panels. When the Novopan plywood was used by the assessee in manufacturing the panel doors, the said panel doors would fall under entry 114 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. We, therefore, hold that the Appellate Tribunal was in error in holding that the panel doors manufactured by the assessee would not fall under entry 114. We accordingly set aside the order of the Appellate Tribunal and restore that of the Deputy Commissioner (CT). The assessing officer is directed to accordingly modify the assessment levying the tax on the turnover relating to the panel doors at the rate of 9 per cent which is applicable to the commodity falling under entry 114 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The tax revision case is accordingly allowed. Petition allowed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 471
... ...
... ... ..... n the present case the latex collection plastic cup or rubber bowl was added to the several items by way of an amendment in 1995 which would clearly show that it would not have been exempt from tax but for the amendment. While interpreting the statute the principle that courts have no power to legislate has to be taken care of as was observed by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal AIR 1992 SC 96. If the amendment had to be given retrospective effect, there was no difficulty to make necessary provision in the notification itself. Such a provision being absent it is not for this Court to hold that the amendment has retrospective effect. 5.. We are of the view that the amendment of the year 1995 is neither clarificatory nor explanatory in nature. The assessee is, therefore, not entitled to exemption from tax in respect of latex collection plastic cup for the assessment year 1994-95. The tax revision case, therefore, stands dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 470
... ...
... ... ..... dule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. But, the Tribunal gave a finding on the ground that the words in any other form including flush doors was added to the entry 114 with effect from February 15, 1989 by the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1989 (4 of 1989) and when this entry is subsequently introduced, it cannot be said that for the assessment year in question the commodity can be classified as the item falling under entry 114. Considering the above facts, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein, viz., Richwood Products Pvt. Ltd., Vijayawada. Under these circumstances we find no merit in this tax revision case and it is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 469
... ...
... ... ..... fertilizer falling under the entry 23. 3.. The arguments of the learned counsel for the Revenue is for the earlier assessment years the Tribunal classified the rock phosphate as falling under the Seventh Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as unclassified goods against which the assessee has preferred T.R.C. Nos. 26 and 33 of 1983 which he did not press. In view of the said judgment rock phosphate is to be classified as unclassified goods. It is difficult to agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the Revenue as there is no decision on merits by this Court. In view of the above, we dismiss the tax revision case. No costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1999 (6) TMI 468
... ...
... ... ..... ssued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh is relevant. The Government of Andhra Pradesh by G.O. Ms. No. 383, Revenue, dated April 17, 1985 clarified that cast iron castings are covered within the term cast iron. Though the cast iron castings are manufactured from pig iron and scrap since it is clarified that cast iron castings fall under item cast iron and since the raw material has already suffered tax the cast iron castings are not liable to be taxed once again as they fall under the same entry of the Third Schedule. In view of the above, we agree with the Tribunal and dismiss the tax revision case. No costs. Petition dismissed.
........
|
