Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2001 2001 (7) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 81 to 100 of 614 Records

• 2001 (7) TMI 1250 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ion on the purchase and sale of DEPB freely and it has a value unrelated to the goods there is no scope of their being treated as actionable claim. DEPB for all practical purposes represent merchandise and is treated and dealt with as such in the commercial world. DEPB is neither a chose in action nor an actionable claim. It has a value of its own. It is by itself a property and it is for this reason that it is freely bought and sold in the market. For all purposes and intents, it is goods. That being the position we find no substance in the plea taken by the petitioner that DEPB cannot be subject to levy of sales tax. The challenge to the notifications therefore fails. However, the grounds taken in the petition regarding the legality of recovery of tax on sale of old office car can be effectively adjudicated by the appellate forum in the appeal filed. Similar is the case with other factual disputes. Writ petition is not entertained and is dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1249 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... slature. In fact, such a thing is unknown to law. Here again, we can usefully refer to the case K. Nagaraj v. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1985 SC 551. In para 36 it is stated as- ........The Legislature, as a body, cannot be accused of having passed a law for an extraneous purpose. Its reasons for passing a law are those that are stated in the Objects and Reasons and if, none are so stated, as appear from the provisions enacted by it. Even assuming that the executive, in a given case, has an ulterior motive in moving a legislation, that motive cannot render the passing of the law mala fide. This kind of transferred malice is unknown in the field of legislation . 28.. In the result and for the foregoing reasons, we uphold the constitutionality of the incorporation of new entry 80A in the First Schedule to the APGST Act by the APGST Amendment Act No. 27 of 1996 with effect from August 1, 1996 and dismissed the writ petitions with no order as to costs. Writ petitions dismissed.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1248 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... as no appeal could be filed in terms of an order refusing to entertain an application under section 55 of the Act. Therefore, the rejection of the petition by the Deputy Commissioner in both the cases merely on the ground that an appeal is provided against the original order of the assessing authority and therefore, there is no case to entertain revision petition, is not in order. Therefore, the orders of the Deputy Commissioner are set aside with direction to take the petitions on file and then dispose of the petitions in accordance with law as to whether there is a case of rectification or not by the assessing authority in these cases, in terms of section 55 of the Act. 7.. The transfer petitions are disposed of as above. 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 July, 2001. Petitions disposed of accordingly.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1247 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ner who was the first appellate authority. He had not considered the circumstances under which the petitioner could not produce the forms earlier. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax as the first appellate authority erred in law in refusing to receive the C declaration forms submitted by the petitioner before him on the ground that he lacked power of reception of such document at the appellate stage. 8.. In the result, the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal (annexure 3) and that of the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (annexure 2) are hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner to consider the circumstances in which the petitioner could not produce the C declaration forms earlier. If he is satisfied with the cause to be shown by the petitioner, he would accept the forms and pass appropriate order according to law. The revision is accordingly allowed. L. MOHAPATRA, J.-I agree. Petition allowed.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1246 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... on, viz., K. Lakshminarayana Holla v. Commercial Tax Officer (S.T.R.P. No. 88 of 1975, disposed of on July 12, 1978), His Lordship Justice E.S. Venkataramaiah, as he then was, speaking for the Bench, held that, it would be necessary to afford an opportunity to the petitioner-assessee to make his submission, before any further action is taken by the learned Magistrate in the proceeding concerned under section 13(3)(b) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. In view of this decision of the division Bench, it has to be concluded that the learned Magistrate erred in dispensing with the notice to the assessee, and in straightaway issuing fine levy warrant. 4.. Petition is, therefore, allowed. Impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to proceed afresh, after issuing notice to the assessee who is the petitioner herein and who is the respondent before the learned Magistrate, and to afford him an opportunity to make his submission. Petition allowed.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1245 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... termine the assessability of the turnovers in question permitting the petitioner to raise the questions raised in these writ petitions. The assessing authority is directed to decide the factual plea taken by the petitioner-assessee in the first instance and on the basis of the finding to determine the tax liability and pass appropriate orders for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94. It is also relevant to direct that in the event of the petitioner-assessee succeeding in his plea that the goods purchased by it from the railways fall under entry 2-A of the Third Schedule of the Act, the tax already collected by the railways and transmitted to the Commercial Tax Department is required to be adjusted or refunded to the petitioner, as the case may be. 8. The Commercial Tax Officer, Kurupam Market Circle, Visakhapatnam, is directed to comply with this direction within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. Petitions disposed of accordingly.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1244 - ITAT JABALPUR
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... d certified by the advocate was furnished along with the return of income. The lapse on the part of the assessee was that the deed accompanying the return was certified by an advocate instead of by the partners, on the basis of which the Assessing Officer proceeded to assess it in the status of association of persons. On being pointed out, the assessee furnished another copy of the revised partnership deed duly certified by all the partners during the course of the assessment proceeding itself. On the basis of the discussion in the preceding paras, we are of the considered view that the assessee by filing a copy of the partnership deed duly certified by all partners during the course of the assessment proceeding complied with the conditions of section 184 and is eligible to be assessed as a firm and not as an association of persons. We, therefore, vacate the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in this regard. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1243 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether the trial court had wrongly dismissed the claim of pre-emptor and it is irrelevant that during the pendency of appeal land was sold in an execution proceeding in another suit?

  Whether the Section 3 of the Act is prospective or retrospective?

  Held that:- Appeal dismissed. We have already quoted substituted section 15 of the amending Act but do not find that the amending Act either expressly or by necessary implication intended to supply an omission or to clear up a doubt as to the meaning of previous Section 15 of the parent Act.the amending Act being prospective in operation does not affect the rights of the parties to the litigation on the date of adjudication of the pre-emption suit and the appellate court is not required to take into account or give effect to the substituted Section 15 introduced by the amending Act.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1242 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,
  

  Settlement of case - Immunities - Grant of

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... the applicant for the credits availed during the period from 28-9-1996 to May, 1999 and intimated to the Commission within two weeks of the receipt of this order. 6. emsp The amount of interest so calculated shall be payable within 30 days of the receipt of a copy of this order by the applicants. 7. emsp The applicants are granted immunity from prosecution for offences under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and from penal liability under the Central Excise Act and the Rules made thereunder in full with respect to the case covered by the applications in question. 8. emsp Attention of the applicants is drawn to sub-section (9) of Section 32F of the Act. The settlement arrived at under this order shall be void if it is subsequently found by the Settlement Commission that it has been obtained by fraud or mis-representation of facts. Attention of all concerned is also drawn to sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of Section 32K so far as the immunity granted in this order is concerned.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1241 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on capital goods

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... f certain industries, which require testing for manufacturing and marketing of the goods. 4. emsp I have heard Shri A.K. Jain, SDR and have gone through the facts on record. 5. emsp It is admitted even in the order-in-original that Automatic Cable Test Equipment was duty paid and has been received by the respondents for testing at different stages of the manufacture and that the test results are required to be supplied to the Department of Communication, who were the buyers of jelly filled cables. 6. emsp I find that in the case of jelly filled cables, the testing could be considered as an integral process towards the completion of the manufacturing process. I therefore, consider that in the present case even prior to 16-3-95, the benefit was available. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) has taken a correct view in the matter. I do not find any infirmity taken in the view taken by her and as a result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. Ordered accordingly.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1240 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
  

  Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on capital goods

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ting authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that panels are meant for regulating the supply of electric current at particular ampere and voltage and being components of T.A. Set, generating set are capital goods. Merely, in the present case, because the panels were used for regulating electric functioning of centrifugal machine, they would not be taken out of the definition of capital goods. No infirmity is found in the views of the Commissioner (Appeals). Revenue rsquo s appeal is accordingly rejected.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1239 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  

  Remand - Non-communication of order of adjudication

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... not in a position to produce the postal acknowledgement. 3. emsp Keeping both the aspects in view it is thought apposite that the matter should be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, (chhindwara) to adjudicate the matter afresh. It will be open to the petitioner to contend before the adjudicating authority that the Circular dated 25-9-1991 is retrospective and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the said circular. The adjudicating authority shall hear the assessee on this issue and such other issues as may be canvassed before him and pass a reasoned order. 4. emsp To cut short delay, it is directed that the petitioner shall appear before the said authority on 16-8-2001 and the authority considering the same shall give another date for hearing. In any case, the entire exercise shall be completed by 15-9-2001. 5. emsp Resultantly the order contained in Annexure P/6 stands quashed. 6. emsp Accordingly the writ petition stands disposed of.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1238 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
  

  Appeal - Abatement of

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... shall be commenced, or if pending at the date of the winding up order, shall be proceeded with, against the company except by leave of the Court and subject to such terms as the Court may impose. 2. emsp Ld. SDR points out to the Rule 22 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules which clearly lays down that when the company is being wound up then the Official Liquidator shall come on record within 60 days and on failure to do so, the Tribunal can dismiss the appeal. He points out that ever as per Order of the High Court, 60 days have lapsed and therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed in terms of CEGAT (Procedure ) Rules. 3. emsp We have carefully considered the submissions made by ld. SDR and perused the provisions of Rule 22 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. In terms of the said Rule, the Official Liquidator ought to have filed an application to seek continuation of the proceedings. He has not done so. Therefore, in terms of Rule 22 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rule, appeal is dismissed as abated.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1237 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
  

  Jurisdiction - Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... eged fraud against the plaintiff as such it is necessary for them also to resolve their issues in the suit. Having regard to the above facts, this court finds that a prima facie case in relation to the allegations of fraud is made out. Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 can put forth all their defences and what are all mentioned in the affidavits, which were filed in support of the applications, in the suit. This order will not be a bar to the parties herein to put forth all their respective defences in the suit. Hence, I have no hesitation to accept the case of the plaintiff that the disputes cannot be resolved by the arbitrator since it is outside the terms and conditions of the bye-laws of the NSE and I answer all the points 1, 2 and 3 in favour of the plaintiff. Hence, the relief sought for by the applicants/defendants cannot be granted and both the applications are liable to be dismissed. 17. In the result, both the applications 1894 of 1998 and 1895 of 1998 are dismissed. No costs.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1236 - HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
  

  Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... Court has necessarily to be dismissed was held to be an incorrect view. It was observed that the suit or proceeding instituted without leave of the Court may be regarded as ineffective unless leave is obtained, but once leave is obtained, the proceeding will be deemed to have been instituted on the date granting leave. After going through the application, I am of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served by granting leave to the State Bank of India to pursue the suit in the Court where it has been filed. The ultimate decision which may be given by the trial Court and the decree which may be passed, would be executed in terms of the directions which may be given by this Court (Company Judge). As to how, the decretal amount, if any, ultimately allowed has to be utilised, would depend upon the directions which may be given by this Court. Appropriate directions can be obtained by any of the parties after the suit is decided. Disposed of accordingly. Order accordingly.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1235 - HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
  

  Compromise or arrangements

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... nies Act, 1956 against any of them and the provisions of Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 are not applicable to (sic) of the Applicant Companies. 15. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, and in view of power as entrusted under sub-section (2) to section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, this Court being satisfied that the Applicant Companies have disclosed all the relevant facts and materials and having brought on record the material fact relating to the Companies, sanction the Compromise/Arrangement made between the Applicant No. 1, M/s. P. Devi Properties Pvt. Ltd. and Applicant No. 2, Shree Jagannath Coal Pvt. Ltd., as shown in the Scheme enclosed as Annexure-5 to the application, as referred and quoted above. 16. The Applicants are given liberty to obtain a certified copy of this order to be filed with the Registrar of the Companies. 17. The Company Application stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Order accordingly.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1234 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS) CALCUTTA
  

  EXIM Policy - EPCG Scheme - Demand - Countervailing duty - Interpretation of Notification

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... taken by the Customs Authorities is inconsistent with and contrary to the view of the Licensing Authority viz. DGFT which issued the licence to the Appellant. This contention is also not tenable because the issue in dispute emanates out of the impugned notification issued by the Customs authorities. The Hon ble Supreme Court, in a decision reported in 1999 (110) E.L.T. 221 (S.C.) AIR 1963 SC 1319 and 1999 (110) E.L.T. 414 (S.C.) AIR 1973 SC 194 have held that if an entry in the ITC Schedule is capable of two interpretations then the interpretation placed by the Customs authorities should be accepted. 21. emsp In view of the above discussion, I find that there is no merit in the appeal and the lower authority is justified in raising the impugned demand of CV duty. 22. emsp Accordingly, I uphold the impugned order confirming the demand, and see no reason to interfere with the same. 23. emsp In consequence of the aforesaid findings, I hereby reject the appeal in the above terms.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1232 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
  

  Application for setting aside arbitral award

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... he parties went to arbitration. Apart from that the learned Arbitrators proceeded on the footing that even assuming that they had jurisdiction and considering clause 11.5 GTL could not claim the amounts in the matter of increased payment in respect of rental and manday charges. This is again in the matter of construction of the agreement. It cannot be said that in so holding and rejecting the claims of GTL the learned arbitrators have either misconducted themselves or failed to exercise jurisdiction or acted in excess of jurisdiction or that the award suffers from any error apparent on the face of the record. 7. In the light of that both the petitions dismissed. In view of dismissal of the petition considering the rules framed by this Court the award dated 14-9-1995 is made decree of this Court. The amount to carry interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum from the date of the decree till final payment. In the circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1231 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
  

  Suspension of legal proceedings

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... tation suggested by the petitioner is to be accepted, it would lead to incongruous results. This would permit the persons like the petitioner to come to the Court obtain the injunction and then pray for stay of such proceedings thereby perpetuating the injunction without any decision on merits. This cannot be permitted. 5. It may be stated that by taking this view, the intendment of SICA is not defeated. After all, the moment reference is registered, the petitioner gets secured by virtue of sub-section (3) of section 22 insofar as encashment of this bank guarantee is concerned. Even if no OMP is filed or pending and even if there is no stay, the respondent No. 1 now cannot invoke/encash the said bank guarantee without the specific permission of the BIFR. In view of such a protection available to the petitioner-company and the Legislature having taken care of these kinds of situations, sub-section (1) of section 22 shall not apply. 6. This application is accordingly dismissed.

  ---

• 2001 (7) TMI 1230 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
  

  Winding-up - Suits stayed on winding-up order

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... of the conclusion drawn above that no charge stands created in favour of the Corporation vis-a-vis the property of the respondent company, i.e., Punwire attached vide orders dated 17-8-1999 and 6-12-1999, it is not possible, for this Court to accept the prayer of the Corporation to allow it to execute the judgment and decree dated 9-9-1999 against the respondent-company, i.e., Punwire, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 7,42,27,312 besides costs and interest from the attached properties as a secured creditor. Thus viewed, I find no merit in the claim of the petitioner-Corporation for being permitted to continue the execution proceedings initiated by it by filing execution proceedings in this Court to enforce the judgment and decree dated 9-9-1999. The Corporation may, if be so advised, make an appropriate claim in this behalf before the liquidator in view of the fact that a winding-up order has already been passed in furtherance of company petition No. 226 of 1999 on 1-2-2001.

  ---

123456789........ 31