|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 593 Records
-
2003 (7) TMI 671 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f Newspapers . This controversy has been adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court in the case of Sait Rikhaji Furtarnal v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1992 85 STC 1 AIR 1991 SC 354 and the Supreme Court has held that old newspapers are also newspapers and would be entitled to exemption provided under the Constitution. It has been held that old newspapers when sold as such would be covered by the exemption provided in the Constitution and sale thereof would not be liable to sales tax. In view of the authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court no fault can be found in the order of the Tribunal. It is accordingly held that old newspapers continue to be newspapers within the meaning of entry 54 of the State List of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. To put it differently the State Legis- lature is not competent to impose sales tax/trade tax on the sale and purchase of old newspapers. I find no merit in the revision. The revision is dismissed accordingly. Petition dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 670 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Admittedly, the petitioner has a right of refund in the light of the appellate order. Petitioner has also made over a representation after the order of the Commissioner. The Commercial Tax Officer has now chosen to issue an endorsement stating therein that the department is considering the suo motu proceedings in the light of the appellate order and that therefore they may not be able to refund the amount. The reasoning at annexure E is unsustainable in law. Once an order has been passed by the appellate authority ordering refund, the same cannot be denied by the respondent particularly in the absence of no revision as on today. Under the circumstances, a case is made out by the petitioner. 5.. Petition stands allowed. The respondent is directed to refund the amount with interest as permissible in law within four weeks from today. No costs. Sri. B.L. Sanjeev, learned High Court Government Pleader is given four weeks time to file his memo of appearance. Writ petition allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 669 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... u (puffed rice) and palalu (parched rice) to find out what was the raw material used for making atukulu, murmuralu (puffed rice) and palalu (parched rice). The items which are sold by the petitioners are included in entry No. 143 of the First Schedule to the Act are exempted from payment of tax. In that view of the matter, the issue has to be answered against the Revenue declaring that the three items being sold by the petitioners shall be entitled for exemption from payment of sales tax in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 130, dated February 14, 1989 and G.O. Ms. No. 540, dated September 5, 2002. 12.. For all the reasons, we allow the two tax revision cases and all the writ petitions holding that the items which are being sold by the petitioners in the tax revision cases and writ petitions shall be entitled for exemption from payment of sales tax in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 130 dated February 14, 1989 and G.O. Ms. No. 540, dated September 5, 2002. No order as to costs. Petitions allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 668 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... July 9, 2002. Thus, it does not fall within the mischief of the rule as enunciated in Wadhwas case AIR 1987 SC 579. 6. A tax is a compulsory exaction of money. The rate has to be fixed by the Legislature. It is the best Judge of the needs of the people. It has to decide the matter in the light of the facts as it faces. This Court cannot go into the validity of the reason on account of which the State revises the rate of tax. 7.. The fact that the appellants did not collect tax despite the requirement of law, is of no consequence. They have only to thank themselves. In any case, consideration of hardship or injustice is really not relevant in the taxing statutes. Equity and tax are not twins. Thus, we find no merit in any of the eleven cases. Resultantly, the writ appeals as well as the writ petition are dismissed. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Order on C.M.P. No. 567 of 2003 in W.A. No. 178 of 2003 dismissed. Writ appeals and writ petition dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 667 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... itioner earlier in the year 1985. The present case, however, is distinguishable to that extent inasmuch as in this case the application for amendment is really a petition for rectification under rule 83 of the Rules. A specific prayer has also been made to make the amendment effective from October 23, 1998, as is evident from the application dated March 16, 2001 in annexure 4 to the writ petition. Therefore, the amendment/rectification has to be given effect to from the date when the original certificate of registration was granted. 7.. For the aforesaid reasons, we have directed that the registration certificates shall stand rectified by indicating the names of the goods for resale, i.e., for use in execution of works contract, with effect from October 23, 1998 and have further directed issuance of necessary declaration form in form C under the Central Act so that the petitioner can avail of the benefits granted under the statute. A.K. PATNAIK, J.-I agree. Petition allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 666 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... observed that the Government must be left free to engage in social experiments. Progress in the social sciences, even as in the physical sciences, depends on a process of trial and error and courts must not interfere with necessary experiments. 83.. In the same decision Justice Brandeis also observed To stay experimentation in things social and economic is a grave responsibility. Denial of the right to experiment may be fraught with serious consequences to the Nation. (See also The Legacy of Holmes and Brandeis by Samuel Kanefsky). 84.. As Mr. Justice Holmes of the U.S. Supreme Court observed in his dissenting judgment in Tyson v. Banton 273 US 418 (at p. 447) I am far from saying that I think this particular law a wise and rational provision. That is not my affair. But if the people of the State of New York speaking by their authorised voice say they want it, I see nothing in the Constitution of the United States to prevent their having their will. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 665 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n September 6, 1999 2001 121 STC 175 affirmed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 6136-6163 of 2000 and connected cases decided on April 20, 2000, holding that entry 25 in the Sixth Schedule of the Act, is unconstitutional, for want of Legislative competence, continues to be binding on the respondents. (iii) As a consequence, it is declared that the authorities under the Act cannot proceed on the basis that entry 25 is restored to the Sixth Schedule of the Act by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court in Associated Cement Companies reported in 2001 124 STC 59 (2001) 4 SCC 593. Nor can they proceed with or decide any proceeding on the basis that entry 25 in the Sixth Schedule is restored to the Act. (iv) All proceedings initiated or orders passed in the cases of petitioners, by the authorities under the Act on the basis of Commissioners Circular No. 17 of 2002-2003 dated September 27, 2002 are quashed. (v) Parties to bear their respective costs. Petitions allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 664 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ners of the Lal dantamanjan that it is meant for healthy gum and bad breath without mentioning any disease for which it is to be applied. Lal dantamanjan is primarily used for cleansing the teeth and it is under usage is like tooth paste or tooth powder. ............. It is sold in betel shop, stationary shop and grocery shop like tooth paste and powder by persons without having drug license and sold without prescription of ayurvedic practitioners against any specific tooth disease. 8.. The above observation made by the Assistant Commissioner cannot be found fault with. In view of what has been stated above, we have no hesitation to hold that Lal dantamanjan is not a drug as defined in section 3(b) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and, therefore, the same is exigible to sales tax under residual item No. 105. 9.. For the reasons aforesaid, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions which are accordingly dismissed. CH. P.K. MISRA, J.-I agree. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 663 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... mstances, I quash the words sub-section (1) in clause (2) explanation to the notification dated November 15, 1996. I further deem it proper to declare that the explanatory meaning to the export is as defined under section 5 in its entirety. 11.. This Court, at the time of admission has confined the writ petition to prayers 1 and 2. The division Bench has directed the petitioner to file an appeal against the assessment order ( C series) and the appeals are filed by the petitioner. The division Bench however, directed the appellate authority not to dispose of the appeal pending decision in this writ petition. Now that I have ruled that export has to be understood as export in terms of section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 I deem it proper to direct the appellate authority to dispose of the appeals in the light of this order and in accordance with law. 12.. Writ petitions are allowed in the above manner. Parties are to bear their respective costs. Writ Petitions allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 662 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... as been also the finding of this Tribunal in a decision reported in Ram Prokash Arora v. C.T.O., Netaji Subhas charge 2004 135 STC 409 (App.) infra (2002) 40 STA 206. 7.. In view of the principles laid down we hold that the appellate officer, (Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, 24 Paraganas Circle) respondent No. 2 was not justified in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for non-deposit of 20 per cent of disputed tax and dismissing the appeal as being not maintainable for that under the amended law. We therefore, hold that the impugned order dated March 26, 2003, passed by the respondent No. 2 is liable to be set aside and is set aside. 8.. The application is thus allowed without any order as to costs. We direct the appellate authority, learned Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, 24 Paraganas (respondent No. 2) to admit the appeal in view of the findings made and to hear the same on merit and to dispose of the same in accordance with law. Application allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 661 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... vehicles, in question, had not moved at all out of the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 78.. In the result and for the reasons discussed above, this writ petition partly succeeds. The impugned orders/directions/instructions contained in the letters, dated February 7, 2002 (annexure B), February 27, 2002 (annexure C), March 14, 2002 (annexure F) and May 7, 2002 (annexure G) aforementioned issued to the petitioner are hereby set aside and quashed. The impugned notice, dated May 27, 2002 (annexure H) also shall stand set aside and quashed. The respondents are, however, left at liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law if they find any specific case of shortpaid sales tax or unpaid sales tax or evasion of sales tax by the petitioner in the course of transactions, which form the subjectmatter of the present writ petition. 79.. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition shall stand disposed of. 80.. No order as to costs. Writ petition partly allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 660 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ts of such concessions. In the case of the present petitioners, the order passed by the Tribunal on December 21, 1996 in Appeal No. 727 of 1989 came to be implemented by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax by his order dated April 20, 2000 on the basis of circular No. 2 of February 13, 1978 and the purchase tax liability was reduced almost to one-third. The impugned administrative circular was in fact void ab initio and it was not required to be considered while deciding the pending appeals pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5034 of 1999 and they were required to be decided by following the law laid down by the Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 727 of 1989. 13.. In the result, we allow the petition and quash and set aside the impugned circular to the extent of clarifications in respect of explanation in clauses (ii) and (iii) as shown above. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (A) and (B). No order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 659 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee by way of advance tax, self-assessment will not be refundable to him. The advance tax and self-assessment tax which is paid by the assessee of his own assessment of his liability and is based on the return of income filed by him. The tax so paid represents the admitted liability of the assessee and failure or inability to frame another assessment after the earlier assessment is set aside or nullified in appropriate proceedings, does not entitle the assessee to claim refund caused to this extent, the assessee has admitted his liability to pay tax, in accordance with law. 14.. In view of the above, the order of the Tribunal so far as it relates imposition of interest on the admitted tax liability, which was sought to be adjusted by the applicant against the refund amount, cannot be sustained. No other point was pressed in the revision. In the result the revision succeeds and is allowed and the demand of Rs. 48,845.18 towards interest is set aside. Petition allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 658 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... the manufacture of the subsequent unit was of different product altogether. Here the fact is otherwise. That being so we hold that the petitioners prayer as made has been rightly rejected by the respondent authority and the point therefore is decided against the petitioner. The application therefore fails. The application is thus dismissed on contest without any order as to costs. The security furnished by way of bank guarantee be invoked to the extent of the petitioners dues. The judgment is delivered in open court and kept in separate sheets along with the record of this case. Both sides are present. The application is dismissed on contest. After the judgment is delivered, the learned advocate for the petitioner prays for staying the case at least for two weeks. The prayer is vehemently opposed by the learned State Representative. We do find any ground for which the order be stayed. The prayer stands rejected. 9.. A. DEB (Technical Member).-I agree. Application dismissed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 657 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... in Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, Kota 1981 48 STC 466 and J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Commercial Taxes Officer 1994 94 STC 422 (SC) we are unable to agree with him. It is true that rule 20 prescribes the timelimit within which the assessee is required to file return and violation thereof can be penalised under section 23 of the State Act. However, an order of penalty cannot be passed under section 10(6) and interest cannot be levied on account of delayed filing of return. 12.. In the premise aforesaid, we hold that the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. Consequently, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned orders are quashed and the cases are remanded to the Tribunal for passing fresh orders on the appeals of the petitioner after hearing its representative. 13.. We also make it clear that the competent authority may, if so advised, take any legally permissible action against the petitioner for delayed filing of returns. Writ petitions allowed.
-
2003 (7) TMI 656 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... spect of the purchase of any industrial input liable to tax under the Act for use by him as a component part or raw material or packing material of any other goods which he intends to manufacture inside the State for sale shall be at the rate of four percent or the rate specified in section 5, whichever is lower, on the taxable turnover relating to such purchase . (Emphasis supplied by us) Obviously, the above provision has no application for the Assessment years 1987-88 to 1993-94. 14.. In the light of the discussion made above, we hold that the petitioner is not entitled for the concessional rate of tax as provided under section 5-A of the Act, on its turnover of purchases of bauxite ore during the assessment years 1987-88, 1989-90 to 1993-94. Hence, we do not see any error in the order of this Tribunal impugned in these revision petition. The revision petitions are accordingly dismissed. However, no order is made as to costs. Revision petitions dismissed. Here italicised.
-
2003 (7) TMI 655 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... mistake and as such there is no force in the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner that initiation of the review proceeding is vitiated in law. 28.. In the result, except point Nos. I and II, other points raised by the petitioner are rejected. As I have already held that this was not a fit case for imposing penalty, the writ application filed by the petitioner is allowed and the orders dated September 6, 2002 imposing penalty under section 7(4) of the Act, read with section 16(9) of the Finance Act, as contained in annexures 17 series, and the demand notices dated September 7, 2002, issued in pursuance thereof, as contained in annexures 16 series, are quashed. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. 29.. Any amount of penalty, paid in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court dated November 27, 2002 shall be adjusted towards the future liability of the petitioner under the Act. R.S. GARG, J.-I Agree. Petition allowed in part.
-
2003 (7) TMI 654 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... , 1992 and the definition of fibre foam in the form of an explanation introduced in entry 111. According to us, the provisions of entry 111 and the explanation thereto inserted by the Finance Act, 1992 has no relevance for the purpose of deciding the question for the assessment year 1991-92. We also do not find any merit in the submission of the Government Pleader that the expression fibre foam is defined in the form of an explanation which has got retrospective effect, for the reason that the expression fibre foam was not available in any of the entries in the First Schedule for making the clarification during the relevant period. 8.. Since the matter relates to the assessment year 1991-92, we direct the assessing authority to pass fresh orders as directed in this judgment within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. We make it clear that this issue is limited for the period from January 1, 1992 to March 31, 1992. Ordered accordingly.
-
2003 (7) TMI 653 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on rule 67 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949 and submitted that the Assessing authority is under statutory obligation to supply copies of the documents or at least decide the application made for that purpose. 3.. In our opinion, the later part of the request made by the learned counsel merits accepts. 4.. Hence, without going into the merits of the grievance made by the petitioner, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction that within 7 days from the date of submission of a certified copy of this order together with a copy of the writ petition, the Assessing Authority shall pass appropriate order on the petitioners application for supply of copies of documents/order sheets. If the officer concerned comes to the conclusion that the copy of any particular document cannot be supplied due to any legal impediment, then he must communicate reasons for doing so to the petitioner. Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of fee prescribed for urgent application.
-
2003 (7) TMI 652 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... natural justice. A reading of the impugned order leaves no manner of doubt that the Excise and Taxation Commissioner has not given any reason whatsoever for declining the petitioners prayer for refund/adjustment of the excess tax already paid. In other words, the impugned order is arbitrary and cryptic to the core. 8.. In the premises aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. Order annexure P-18 is quashed and Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab, is directed to pass a fresh order on the petitioners application for refund/adjustment of the excess tax, if any paid, under the Act. 9.. The petitioner is directed to appear before Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab, on August 25, 2003 through its representative or Advocate. Within next two months, the concerned authority shall decide the petitioners prayer for refund/adjustment of tax by passing a speaking order. 10.. Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of fee prescribed for urgent applications. Petition allowed.
........
|
