|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 649 Records
-
2002 (1) TMI 1270 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... the findings of the honourable High Court the orders passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes are hereby set aside. The learned Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, shall take steps for release of such part of the goods as per direction of the honourable court covered by the way bill and reopen the penalty proceeding accordingly, as if the remaining part of the goods were seized for violation of the provisions of section 68 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. 9.. Steps to be taken by the learned Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes for re-hearing of the matter giving opportunity to the petitioner of being heard after due service of notice. The impugned orders dated September 6, 1999 and October 11, 2001 are accordingly set aside so far as it relates to the release of the goods covered by the way bill. 10.. With these observations we allow this application. No order as to costs. Application allowed.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1269 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the due amount from the petitioner. However, the State should only collect whatever is actually due. Nothing more. Since the issue raised by the counsel for the petitioner deserves examination, it would not be fair to disallow the relief solely on account of delay in approaching the appellate authority. This is all the more so in view of the fact that the petitioner had approached this Court without any avoidable loss of time. 5.. Taking the totality of circumstances into consideration, we find that the amount due from the petitioner must have multiplied manifold. However, in case the petitioner makes the deposit of the amount as assessed within four weeks from today and files appeals in respect of different years of assessment within six weeks (from today), the appellate authority shall consider the matter on merits. It shall not dismiss the appeals on the ground of delay. 6.. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. No costs. Writ petitions disposed of accordingly.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1268 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he turnover. The assessee has put forward an explanation for not maintaining the manufacturing account. The assessee contends that fibre glass boats are manufactured against specific orders from customers and that evaluation of the consumption of the materials in each case is not feasible. It is also pointed out that materials left over in the course of production in one case are often capable of use in other cases and, in fact, are so used. Having regard to the nature of the work thus done by the assessee, the Tribunal found the assessee s explanation plausible. It is therefore clear that the assessing authority went wrong in estimating the turnover by addition on the hypothesis of suppression solely based on the absence of the manufacturing account. 6.. We do not think that the finding of the Tribunal is either perverse or arbitrary warranting the exercise of the revisional power. In the result the tax revision case fails and it is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1267 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... er on May 31, 1994, i.e., almost seven years from first exemption and four years after second exemption. It is not permissible. It has to be set aside on this short ground alone. It is apart from the fact that no show cause notice was given to the petitioner as to why and on what basis, the exemption already granted by the competent authority and which was availed of by the petitioner is being withdrawn and that too by taking up the issue suo motu by the State without there being any reason. It is not in dispute nor it has ever been the case of State that while granting the exemptions it has any element of fraud or/and forgery attributable to the petitioner. 13.. Consequently and as a result of aforesaid discussion, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Impugned order dated May 31, 1994 (annexure F) and other two consequential orders dated August 8, 1994 (annexure H) and order dated December 29, 1995 (annexure L) are quashed by writ of certiorari. No costs. Petition allowed.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1266 - SUPREME COURT
Whether action under Section 29 of the Act is called for?
Held that:- Section 29 gives a right to the Financial Corporation inter alia to sell the assets of the industrial concern and realize the property pledged, mortgaged, hypothecated or assigned to the Financial Corporation. This right accrues when the industrial concern, which is under a liability to the Financial Corporation under an agreement, makes any default in repayment of any loan or advance or any instalment thereof or in meeting its obligations as envisaged in Section 29 of the Act. Section 29(1) gives the Financial Corporation in the event of default the right to take over the management or possession or both and thereafter deal with the property.
As learned counsel for the respondents during the course of hearing submitted that unit is in the possession of the Corporation. They will make effort to make payment of the amount due to the Corporation, if a reasonable time is granted. Though their stand has always been different, and the Corporation opposes the prayer, we grant the prayer in the peculiar circumstances of the case. To test the bona fides of the respondents, we direct that the Corporation shall intimate the respondents within a month from to-day upto date amount due. Within six months from the date of such intimation, the respondents shall repay the amount in full. In case of failure to make the payment, it shall be open to the Corporation to dispose of the seized unit in accordance with law in such manner as would bring in the highest price. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1265 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... n view all these factors, we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to pass fresh orders, after examining such evidences as well contentions as the assessee may rely upon, in a fair and objective manner and by way of a speaking order. The Assessing Officer may also bear in mind the broad principles discussed in paragraph 16 (page 29) above, as they may be applicable on the facts found by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall further be at liberty to obtain such information, as he may deem necessary and relevant in adjudication on the issue of taxability of ad hoc subsidy in the hands of the assessee, directly from the Government of Orissa. We also direct the assessee-corporation to make available such information, as may be requisitioned by the Assessing Officer, and to fully co-operate with the Assessing Officer in expeditious disposal of the matter. In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1264 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... h stands assessed in the hands of these two ladies. Now remains the mere statement which was based on estimate and in the absence of any jewellery no addition was warranted in the hands of the assessee. The learned Accountant Member was justified in observing that even if any addition was warranted that could be made in the hands of the two ladies who were found owners of the jewellery as per the stand taken by the Assessing Officer himself by making addition in respect of unexplained investment in jewellery by these two ladies. The Assessing Officer nowhere records that the assessee had made unexplained investment in jewellery found at the time of the search or he was the owner of any piece of jewellery. In the absence of such concrete finding no addition is warranted. In view of this I concur with the view taken by the learned Accountant Member on both the points of difference in question. The matter will now go to the regular Bench for deciding the appeal according to law.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1263 - SUPREME COURT
Repealed Act known as Kolar Pocket Scheme - The Scheme provided that the State Transport Undertaking shall operate services on all the routes to the complete exclusion of other private operators except that the existing permit holders on the inter-State route may continue to operate on such inter-State route, subject to conditions that their permits shall be rendered ineffective for the overlapping portions of the notified routes and that the existing operators whose permits overlap the notified portions between Bagepalli to Chelur and Pathpatya Cross only may continue to operate on such routes subject to conditions that their permits would be rendered ineffective for the overlapping portions.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1262 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... nt adjudication order they submitted a letter on 4th July, 2000 along with a letter regarding details of the account maintained by them. However, in spite of all this material on record both the authorities below have chosen to close their eyes to the documentary evidence submitted by the appellant and have turned a Nelson rsquo s eye to the entire material produced by the Commissioner in respect of their claim of satisfaction of the conditions prescribed in the notification. 4. emsp In view of this we set aside the impugned order which suffers from total non-application of mind thus resulting in the importers being driven from pillar to post and send the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the documentary evidence already on record before him and such further evidence as the importer may seek to submit before him and pass fresh orders in accordance with the law after affording personal hearing to the appellants. 5. emsp The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1261 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Dutiability - Intermediate product ... ... ... ... ..... marketing the said powder. However, the Revenue has also not brought on record any evidence in the form of invoice etc. in which the said powder is being marketed. It is also required to be seen whether the powder manufactured by the said Polycon International Ltd. is the same powder, which is in dispute in these appeals. In view of all these facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that there is no sufficient material on record to decide the matters and these matters should be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for afresh adjudication after taking evidence from both the sides. The Adjudicating Authority will also consider the plea of the respondents that they are eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 1/93. In case the product is held to be chargeable to Central Excise duty, the Modvat availability has also to be considered by the Adjudicating Authority. Thus, all the appeals are allowed by way of remand. (Pronounced in the Court)
-
2002 (1) TMI 1260 - ITAT DELHI
Capital gains ... ... ... ... ..... worked out at higher figure. Such an approach is, in our opinion, contrary to the tax statute and cannot be approved. We have no hesitation, in our opinion, in holding that the Department has failed to bring any evidence on record in support of understatement of sale consideration by the assessee and mere report of the Valuation Officer, which is controverted by the valuation report of the approved valuer filed by the assessee, would not support the allegation of understatement of sale consideration by the assessee. In the circumstances, we reverse the finding of the ld. CIT (A) and hold that the sale consideration of the property would be adopted at the figure as disclosed by the assessee for the purposes of computation of capital gain. 11. With regard to levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C, ld. Counsel submitted that these grounds may be treated as consequential in nature. We hold accordingly. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed of as above.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1259 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Writ jurisdiction - Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... uty payable on the consignment. In view of the interim order, the petitioners have already exported their goods. Now, what remains is the adjudication of the duty and satisfaction thereof. The respondents in spite of grant of liberty to proceed with the adjudication of duty failed to adjudicate upon the same. The respondents failed in their duty to protect the interest of revenue. However, considering the involvement of public revenue, we direct the respondents to adjudicate upon the question of payment of duty on the consignment exported by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of writ of this order from this Court. The petitioners are directed to keep the bank guarantee renewed till the adjudication is completed and six months thereafter. All the contentions of the parties including that of the petitioners are kept open. 6. emsp The petition stands disposed of in terms of above order with no order as to costs.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1258 - CEGAT, BANGALORE
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... roduct with reference to description in the relevant tariff entry during the period. Further he pointed that U-Foam Pvt. Ltd. has followed the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Premier Tyres Ltd. reported in 1985 (20) E.L.T. 124. He said that since the tariff entry is different in the present case, the matter is required to be examined with reference to the relevant description in the tariff entry and simply cannot be relied upon the earlier decision in arriving at the conclusion. 3. emsp Smt. Radha Arun, SDR appearing for the Revenue has no objection to remand the matter for de novo consideration. 4. emsp In the facts and circumstance of the case and in view of the submissions made by both sides the matter is remanded to the concerned adjudicating authority to examine the matter afresh with reference to Tariff entry and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law on providing an opportunity to the party. Thus this appeal is allowed by way of remand.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1257 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Compounded Levy scheme ... ... ... ... ..... 9-97 and again by its letter dated 31-3-98 had opted out of the provisions of Rule 96ZO(3). In this view of the matter prima facie it appears that annual production capacity determination shall be applicable only from 1-9-97 to 31-3-98. During this period the total differential duty is approximately Rs. 1,42,00,000/- (Rupees one crore forty two lakh). Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case as also the financial position we direct the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs. 70,00,000/- (Rupees seventy lakh) on or before 19-3-2002. On deposit of this amount deposit of the balance amount of duty and penalty shall be dispensed with and recovery thereof shall remain stayed. 5. emsp Failure to comply with the above direction shall lead to vacation of the stay and dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. 6. emsp In case compliance is reported the matter shall be taken up for regular hearing on the same date.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1256 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
EXIM Policy - EPCG Licence - Interest - Differential duty ... ... ... ... ..... expiry of the five years, we note that the conditions of the Notification cited above, were duly complied with. 9.2 emsp Insofar as the confiscation of the imported goods is concerned, we note that there was only one condition and that condition was in respect of the payment of differential duty before expiry of the five years. Since the differential duty was paid before expiry of five years, there was no question of any confiscation of the goods. 9.3 emsp Insofar as the payment of interest is concerned, the liability to pay interest would have arisen only if the duty would have remained outstanding after expiry of five years. In the instant case, since duty was paid before expiry of the five years, there was no question of any interest liability arising. In these circumstances, we hold that no interest was payable. In view of the above findings and discussions, the appeal is allowed. Consequential relief, if any, shall be admissible to the appellants, in accordance with law.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1255 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... position of the party it is submitted that their unit is referred to the BIFR and the same is registered as case No. 521/97 with the Board. In support of this contention, the appellants have filed a copy of the letter of BIFR dated 24-4-97. It is observed that the appellants have voluntarily paid the duty amount. Prima facie therefore, there does not appear to be a strong case on merits in their favour. Though their case is stated to be referred to the BIFR in 1997, their unit is still functioning and their working does not appear to be impaired in any manner on account of the financial stringency. In view of these facts therefore, I direct the appellants to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five thousand only) on or before 7-2-2002 as part of the penalty. On making such deposit, the deposit of balance amount of penalty shall stand waived and its recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal. The matter will be called for reporting compliance on 12-2-2000.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1254 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Redemption fine and penalty - Quantum of ... ... ... ... ..... t during the period of importation and of adjudication, very substantial demurrage had been incurred. He would also submit that for conversion of blocks into slabs considerable expenditure would be involved. He prays for adjustment of such expenditure. We have seen this projection and we find some of them as excessively projected. For example, the activity of fibre filing is a limited one where holes and defects are seen. It could not be projected as routine expenditure. We also observe that the part of the delay is on account of the importers themselves. 9. emsp Following the law so laid down, we reduce the quantum of fine in Appeal No. C/1043/2001-Mum. to Rs. 35 lakhs (Rupees thirty five lakhs) and penalty to Rs. 8 lakhs (Rupees eight lakhs), we reduce the fine in Appeal No. C/1047/2001-Mum. to Rs. 4 lakhs (Rupees Four lakhs) and penalty to Rs. 1 lakhs (Rupees One lakh). 10. emsp Appeals are disposed of in the above terms. Consequential reliefs are ordered according to law.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1253 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... ff Item 68. (b) We also find, that in the facts of this case, duty was collected and thereafter considered and refunded only on 30-3-1974. The view of the Assistant Collector changed only on 18-9-75, to hold that such goods would be covered under Item 30A. Thereafter a notice came to be issued for recovery of erroneous refund only on 10-10-1977. This notice was clearly barred by limitation provided under Section 11A. Since, we find that the larger period of the proviso to the Section 11A and ingredients to invoke the same to be non-existing in this case to justify the Erroneous Refund Recovery Demands. The notice dated 10-10-77 is barred by limitation. Therefore, the entire proceedings initiated by this notice dated 10-10-1977 are barred and are required to be struck down. 6. emsp In view of our findings, the notices and the consequent proceedings of recovery or erroneous refund are struck down being barred by limitation and Revenue rsquo s appeal is dismissed in consequence.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1252 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Demand - Quantification of ... ... ... ... ..... amount will not arise. Apart from the fact that duty has not been quantified, the goods are still in the bonded warehouse of the applicant and are subject to control by the Customs department. 2. emsp The application is therefore dismissed as unnecessary. 3. emsp This being the case, the letter dated 1-10-2001 of the jurisdictional Superintendent issued to the applicant threatening action under law, if the applicant refuses to pay Rs. 20.67 lakhs confirmed in the Deputy Commissioner rsquo s order of 29-4-1998, is not to be given effect to. In any event, this letter is completely erroneous. The Deputy Commissioner rsquo s order dated 29-4-1998 has been set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) rsquo order dated 25-8-2000, in which the matter was remanded for adjudication afresh. It is in the course of such adjudication that the Deputy Commissioner rsquo s order dated 19-3-2001, which has been confirmed on appeal by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) impugned in the appeal.
-
2002 (1) TMI 1251 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Appeals - Appealable orders ... ... ... ... ..... oceed- ings before the arbitral Tribunal by approaching this Court with appeals against certain orders/observations which do not lie under the provisions of the Act. If appeals against such arbitral findings/observations are entertained, it would be contrary to the scheme and objects of the Act and will frustrate the very object of the legislation where the emphasis is on minimising the judicial intervention. 16. Thus having considered the matter in its entirety and for the foregoing reasons, this Court has no hesitation in holding that none of the appeals are against the arbitral order granting or refusing to grant any interim measure under section 17 and therefore the present appeals under section 37 before this Court are wholly misconceived and not maintainable. The appeals stand accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000 in each appeal to be deposited with the Delhi State Legal Authority within a period of four weeks. Interim orders dated 19-9-2001 are hereby vacated.
........
|
