|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 593 Records
-
2003 (7) TMI 691 - SUPREME COURT
Whether no application for condonation of delay has been filed in terms of the proviso appended to sub-section (2) of Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act?
-
2003 (7) TMI 690 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... di, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 689 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ee no reason to interfere. The Civil Appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 688 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the mode of giving public notice of the assessment list is mandatory or directory?
Whether the mode of publication prescribed in section 149(1) as opposed to publication itself, was mandatory and hold that the publication in the newspapers was in substantial compliance with the requirements of the sub- section?
-
2003 (7) TMI 687 - SUPREME COURT
Enhancement of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Whether without any rational basis the High Court has enhanced the compensation, while the Tribunal under the Act had indicated cogent reasons for the award made by it?
-
2003 (7) TMI 686 - SUPREME COURT
Whether sub-Rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 does not contain any provision wherefrom it can be deduced that the deemed suspension for custodial detention exceeding forty eight hours would continue until it is withdrawn?
-
2003 (7) TMI 685 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 15. Before parting with the matter, we may observe that we have made all the observations hereinabove only for the purpose of not entertaining the petition at this stage. As and when the matter will come up before an appropriate court/authority, it will be decided on its own merits, without being influenced by the above observations. All contentions of parties are kept open. 16. The learned counsel for the petitioners at this stage prays that some time may be granted and till that period, no coercive action be taken by the respondent-authorities. In our opinion, no such prayer can be granted, in the light of the fact that we are not entertaining the petitioner, the Rules had been brought into force and effected. Even otherwise, considering the underlying object and legislative mandate of Section 406 of the Act also, no prayer for stay can be granted. Hence, the prayer is rejected. Parties be given copies of this order duly authenticated by the Sheristedar/Private Secretary.
-
2003 (7) TMI 684 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the cost of the plant and machinery installed in or upon a building is includible for the purpose of arriving at the rateable value of the building? and Whether Section 116 (3) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the DMC Act") vests arbitrary and uncanalised discretion in Commissioner and is, therefore, invalid for excessive delegation of legislative powers?
-
2003 (7) TMI 683 - SUPREME COURT
Whether settlement of a private dispute between the parties to a writ proceeding is permissible in law?
Held that:- It is now well-settled that an order passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity. Any order passed or action taken pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof would also be nullities. In the instant case, as the High Court did not have any jurisdiction to record the compromise for the reasons stated hereinbefore and in particular as no writ was required to be issued having regard to the fact that public law remedy could not have been resorted to, the impugned orders must be held to be illegal and without jurisdiction and are liable to be set aside. All orders and actions taken pursuant to or in furtherance thereof must also be declared wholly illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently are liable to be set aside. They are declared as such.
A party cannot be made to suffer adversely either indirectly or directly by reason of an order passed by any court of law which is not binding on him. The very basis upon which a judicial process can be resorted to is reasonableness and fairness in a trial. Appeal allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 682 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... fact of sale of goods to M/s. IKEA and their subsequent export. What is objected is the name of Merchant Exporter, i.e. M/s. IKEA Trading is not given on AR-5/ARE2. Govt. observes that this is only a procedural lapse and cannot come in the way of substantive benefit. 14. Govt. also observes that in para 18 of the impugned Order-in-Appeal, Commissioner (A), has given directions to the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, to be followed, before passing, rebate benefit. Govt. upholds these directions. As discussed earlier, disclaimer certificate from other manufacturers of exported goods is also to be submitted to the lower Authority by the Respondents. The Respondents are also directed to submit documentary evidence to substantiate their submissions made before Revisionary Authority regarding all activities being carried out under the supervision of the Central Excise Authorities. With the above modifications, the impugned Order-in-Appeal is upheld. 15. So ordered.
-
2003 (7) TMI 681 - UNITED KINGDOM VAT & DUTIES TRIBUNALS
... ...
... ... ..... Appellant had been aware that he only had the right of appeal against the re-registration, and not against the assessment. We decided that it was clear both from the wording of the grounds of appeal, and the content of the Respondents' letter dated 4 February 1999 that the situation was entirely clear to him. In addition, at the time he lodged his appeal he had solicitors acting for him. 38. We are satisfied on the basis of all the evidence before us that the Appellant was not properly declaring his takings. Furthermore, although we have doubts about Mr Clark's methods and methodology, in particular with regard to the raising of the assessment, nonetheless we are satisfied for the reasons advanced by Mr Keller that the amount of underdeclaration was sufficient such that, had the Appellant maintained true records, he would have been over the registration limits at all times. In all the circumstances therefore this appeal is dismissed. 39. There is no order for costs.
-
2003 (7) TMI 680 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... g member of Sikh Community, the order of the Tribunal under section 21 of the Act for the assessment year 1984-85 cannot be sustained. For the assessment year 1985-86 as against the information with the department that the applicant has imported timber to the tune of about Rs. 40,000 the Tribunal has fixed the turnover in the reassessment proceedings at Rs. 90,000 on the basis of the assessment of the previous year. Since the reassessment order of the previous year has been set aside by me, I think in the interest of justice and taking a lenient view in the matter the turnover of imported timber should be fixed at Rs. 70,000. The order of the Tribunal is modified to that extent. For the assessment year 1986-87 I do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal. The revision so far as to the year 1986-87 is concerned stand dismissed. The T.T.R. No. 38 of 1997 is allowed. The T.T.R. No. 14 of 1997 is allowed in part as indicated above. The T.T.R. No. 15 of 1997 is dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 679 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... bags have not been returned to the petitioner. The Tribunal on the facts of the case has rightly observed that it is open to the petitioner to avail the remedy with regard to ten bags of supari in his order. The petitioner in the light of the order by the Tribunal has chosen to make several representations and those representations have been rejected. At this stage it is not possible for the State to return ten bags of supari. On the facts and circumstances of this case, I deem it proper to issue a direction to the State Government to refund the value of the amount of ten bags of supari within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order taking into consideration the price prevailing on the date of unloading. The State Government is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000 towards interest and costs. Ordered accordingly. No costs. Sri. B.L. Sanjeev, learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file his memo of appearance within four weeks from today.
-
2003 (7) TMI 678 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he trade, by the dealer and the consumer. It is they who are concerned with it, and it is the sense in which they understand it that constitutes the definitive index of the legislative intention when the statute was enacted. The decision of the Supreme Court in Indo International Industries case 1981 47 STC 359 was also referred. The Supreme Court observed that it is a matter of common experience that the identity of an article is associated with its primary function, it is only logical that it should be so when a consumer buys an article, he buys it because it performs a specific function for him it is the functional character of the article which identifies it in the mind of the consumer. Thus by applying the common parlance theory or by applying the functional test both laid down by the Supreme Court conclusion is irresistible that disposable syringe can never be treated as an article of plastic. We do not find any merit in these revisions. They are accordingly dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 677 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tters are also required for a satisfactory adjudication of the question as to whether the case put forward by the assessee that the transactions represents stock transfer/consignment sales is correct or not. We also find that both the assessing authority and the first appellate authority had simply relied on a tender notification No. 33/86-87/AT dated May 23, 1986. It would appear that the said two authorities had solely relied on the terms and conditions of the said tender without factually ascertaining as to whether the transaction covered by stock transfer was made pursuant to the said tender. In these circumstances, we set aside the order of the Tribunal and remit the matter to the Tribunal for passing fresh orders in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made herein above. It is open to the parties to lead evidence in support of their respective contentions and to rely on decisions governing this question. All these revisions are disposed of as above.
-
2003 (7) TMI 676 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nd the impugned order by asserting that special leave petition filed against the judgment of the division Bench of the High Court is pending. 4.. In our opinion, mere pendency of the special leave petition cannot justify initiation and/or continuance of the proceedings under the Act which has been declared unconstitutional. Indeed, it is not the case of the respondent that operation of the order passed by this Court in Pioneer Agro Extracts Ltd. v. State of Punjab 2002 125 STC 532 has been stayed by the Supreme Court. Therefore, we have no hesitation to quash the impugned order. 5.. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed and order annexure P3 is declared illegal and quashed. 6.. However, it is made clear that the respondent shall be free to take appropriate action for levy and recovery of cess if the judgment of this Court in the case of Pioneer Agro Extracts Ltd. v. State of Punjab 2002 125 STC 532 is reversed by the Supreme Court. Writ petition allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 675 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ion certificate. This order was confirmed in appeal but has been set aside by the Tribunal by the order under revision. 3.. Heard the counsel for the parties. The Tribunal has recorded finding that there is no dispute that the dealer-opposite party is manufacturer of laminated jute bags. In laminated jute bags polythene sheets are also used. The Tribunal has recorded finding that if the dealer manufactures polythene himself or get it manufactured by someone else and the polythene is used in the laminated jute bags, then certainly granules are raw material for the manufacture of laminated jute bags. Lamination of jute bags will only increase the process of manufacturing. The Tribunal has also observed that in case it is found that the dealer is not using the polythene thus manufactured, the necessary and proper steps may be taken by the department against the dealer. I do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal. The revision is dismissed summarily. Petition dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 674 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ral previous occasions and hearing of appeal was adjourned, there is no reason and adjournment had been sought with some motive. Therefore this case is also distinguishable. 18.. Strong reliance was placed by the counsel for the applicant on 2002 NTN 580 (Lord Krishna Textiles Mill v. Commissioner of Sales Tax). I have gone through the said judgment and it has no application. In that case the Tribunal had earlier granted 38 adjournments. Thereafter the Tribunal rejected the subsequent adjournment application. In that connection it was held that adjournment application should be considered on its own merits and the case was remanded. This case is also not applicable. For the same reason the judgment reported in 2003 NTN 141 (Inder Steels v. Commissioner of Sales Tax) has also no application, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 19.. For the reasons given above I do not find any merit in the petition. The petition is dismissed summarily. Writ petition dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 673 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the authority concerned may also consider the applications for releasing the goods and vehicle on supurdagi after taking adequate security, if any, in accordance with law if they have done so in other matters and have released the goods and vehicles of the other parties following the rule of equality before law. It is further directed that in case the prayer of releasing goods and vehicles, is declined, the respondent shall make adequate arrangements for the safe protection of the seized property into the proper custody so that the petitioner may not suffer any losses. It is further expected that the respondent shall complete the aforesaid exercise expeditiously say within 30 days from the date of the communication of this order looking to the attachment and custody of perishable goods in this rainy season. It is also expected that the petitioner shall also co-operate in quick disposal of the enquiry. Parties to bear their own costs. Record be returned. Petition disposed of.
-
2003 (7) TMI 672 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... imited. Therefore, instead of ordering the refund of this amount to Tata Cummins Limited, we direct that this amount will be adjusted by the respondents towards the sales tax liabilities of Tata Cummins Limited for the accounting year commencing on April 1, 2004. The result We, therefore, allow this writ petition and quash the order of the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. We hold that Tata Cummins Limited is entitled to the benefit of the Industrial Policy, 1995 and the Notifications S.O. Nos. 478 and 479 dated December 22, 1995. Instead of directing the refund of the amount of Rs. 54.5 crores to Tata Cummins Limited, we direct the respondent-State and the authorities of the Commercial Taxes Department under the Bihar Finance Act, to adjust the refundable amount, towards sales tax due from Tata Cummins Limited for the accounting year commencing on April 1, 2004. We direct the parties to suffer their respective costs. R.K. MERATHIA, J. - I agree. Writ petition allowed.
........
|
