Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Recent Case Laws

Order By:

 
  • Income Tax
  • GST
  • S. Tax
  • C. Excise
  • Customs
  • VAT/CST
  • Co. Laws
  • FEMA
  • Others
  1. 2017 (12) TMI 644 - ITAT MUMBAI

    Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd. Versus Addl. CIT, Range-3, Thane, Thane (W)

    Disallowance of depreciation on Crawler Cranes and Dozers - entitled for depreciation 15 and not 30 as claimed by the assessee - Held that - It is not possible to include each and every type of vehicle in the depreciation schedule. Due to rapid industrialization, the various types of machines used in transport business are increasing day after day with each machine carrying out a particular type of activity in a more efficient manner. These machi....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 639 - ITAT MUMBAI

    M/s Seth Properties Versus Income Tax Officer-12 (1) (3) , Mumbai

    Nature of amount received as compensation towards rent out property - Mense profit - revenue receipt or capital receipt - Whether the receipt was treated as rent from the said premises and accordingly treated as income from house property and was brought to tax? - Held that - Mense profit is not revenue receipt but capital in nature. Identical ratio was laid down in the case of Narang Overseas 2008 (2) TMI 817 - ITAT MUMBAI and M/s Goodwill Theat....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 634 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Versus Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

    Sales tax subsidy - addition to the income of the Assessee by treating it as revenue receipt - Held that - With regard to the very same sales tax subsidy provided in the State of Haryana, pursuant to the Scheme in force in the said State during the AY in question, this Court, in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Johnson Matthey India (P) Limited 2015 (3) TMI 1305 - DELHI HIGH COURT allowed it as capital receipt - Thus issue answered the said issue in....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 633 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- 1, Rajkot Versus Kutch District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd.

    Addition u/s 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) - claim for deduction of bad and doubtful debts at the rate of 10 of the average advances made by the assessee s rural branches - Held that - Merely making of a claim which was not accepted or not acceptable to the Revenue would not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars so as to attract the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In the facts of the present case, the entire penalty order is based ....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 631 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Same Deutz Fahr India Private Limited

    TPA - Computation of income from international transaction having regard to arm s length price - comparability selection of M/s.HMT Limited - Held that - In the instant case, whether M/s.HMT Limited can be a comparable or not is a factual issue. The learned Tribunal has factually assessed the similarities between M/s.HMT Limited and the respondent assessee and the same, in our considered opinion, does not warrant interference of this Court under ....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 625 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    M/s. R.R.B. Consultants And Engineers (P) Limited Versus DCIT

    Entitlement to the deduction u/s 80-IA - income from generation of power - entitled to deduction on the gross receipt without reducing depreciation under Section 80-IA - Held that - Expenses incurred and depreciation has to be reduced from the gross receipt, to arrive at the figure on which deduction is to be allowed under Section 80 IA of the Act. Deduction was to be allowed only on the net profits of the said undertaking, which was eligible for....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 615 - ITAT DELHI

    DCIT Circle Haridwar, Haridwar Versus United Concept And Solution Pvt. Ltd.

    Addition of Project Monitoring Expenses and Erection and Commissioning Charges - whether the assessee has failed before the A.O to specify the reason of less profit this year although turnover went up substantially as compare to last year - Held that - As perused all the records and gone through the order of the CIT(A) wherein the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition as the Assessing Officer made the estimated addition or ad-hoc addition witho....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 613 - ITAT MUMBAI

    Oasis Securities Ltd. Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 4 (2) And The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4 (2) (1) , Mumbai

    Disallowance u/s 14A - Held that - We find that the assessee himself has suo moto made disallowance of ₹ 58,095/- before CIT(A). On query from the Bench, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative ( DR ) could not counter the judgement of the Hon ble Delhi High Court before us, or he could not brought any precedent of Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in Revenue s favour. Accordingly, we are of the view that the issue is squarely covered a....... + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 612 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM

    K.L. Prasada Rao Versus ITO, Ward-1, Srikakulam

    Estimation of income on sale of IMFL - profit estimation - Held that - In IMFL business, few newspapers have no doubt mentioned about considered sale of liquor at a higher price i.e. at a price higher than the rate fixed by the Government, but the fact remains that in the assessee s case, there is nothing on record to suggest that he has flouted the norms and sold liquor at a higher price. The Government of Andhra Pradesh through AP Beverages Cor....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 611 - ITAT MUMBAI

    ITO-10 (1) (2) , Mumbai Versus IDM Agro Bio Tech Ltd. And Vice-Versa

    Reopening of assessment - non compliance with section 151 - reasons to believe - Held that - The reopening in this case lacks jurisdiction on twin counts. Firstly, the assessee has not been properly intimated about any such satisfaction/approval despite request in the objection to reopening filed before the Assessing Officer repeatedly. Secondly, in the remand proceedings before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), a sanction/approval le....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 609 - ITAT RAJKOT

    Dorf Ketal Speciality catalyst Pvt Ltd. Versus The ACIT, Circle – 1, Gandhidham-Kutch

    TPA - ALP adjustment on account of interest on receivables - Held that - We see no reasons to take any other view of the matter than the view so taken by us in the case of Micro Ink 2015 (12) TMI 143 - ITAT AHMEDABAD . Respectfully following the same, we uphold the grievance of the assessee and delete the impugned ALP adjustment of ₹ 57,32,095/- on account of interest on receivables. The assessee gets relief accordingly........ + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 600 - ITAT KOLKATA

    DCIT, Circle-11 (1) , Kolkata Versus M/s Machino Techno Sales Pvt. Ltd. And Vice-Versa

    Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D(2)(ii) - Held that - There is sufficient own funds available with the assessee company for making the investments. But we find that the investments were carried over from the earlier years and whether the same were made out of own funds or out of borrowed funds, the details of which are not available before us. That is precisely the requirement of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Dhanuka & So....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 599 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

    Smt. Niharika Maheshkumar Trivedi, Harikrishna Technopride Engg Versus The ITO, Ward-6 (4) , Ahmedabad

    Gain on sale of land/factory shed - Revenue contends that the original factory shed never formed part of the block of asset as no depreciation has been admittedly claimed on the factory shed in transfer nor has been allowed - section 50 Applicability - Held that - It is an admitted position that the assessee has never claimed any depreciation on the asset under transfer. Therefore, the very premise for claiming the same to be part of block of ass....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 598 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

    The DCIT (OSD) , Range-1, Ahmedabad Versus M/s. Casil Health Products Ltd.

    Deemed dividend addition u/s 2(22)(e) - taxability of loans/advances received by the assessee - Held that - We find that the legal fiction in section 2(22)(e) enlarges the definition of dividend but does not extend to or broaden the concept of a shareholder . As the assessee is not a shareholder of the lender-company, the receipt is not susceptible to tax under s.2(22)(e) in its hands . See Baumik Colour Pvt.Ltd. 2008 (11) TMI 273 - ITAT BOMBAY-E....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 595 - ITAT DELHI

    ITO, Ward 16 (1) , New Delhi Versus MCT India Infotech Pvt. Ltd.

    Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - assessee is not entitled to seek deduction u/s 10B and for want of meeting this requirement the claim of the assessee becomes a wrong claim - Held that - It is an admitted fact that the moment the notice was issued calling upon the assessee to explain why the deduction u/s 10B should not be disallowed, the assessee filed a return of income withdrawing the claim for deduction u/s 10B of the Act. In the circumstances, we fin....... + More


  16. 2017 (12) TMI 593 - ITAT MUMBAI

    M/s Laxmi Diamond Pvt Ltd. Versus Addl CIT-5 (2) , Mumbai

    Disallowance of exchange fluctuation loss on forward contracts - nature of speculative transactions - whether the assessee is able to have one to one co-relation between forward contracts and its bills receivables / payables? - AO opined it to be in the nature of speculative transactions as defined u/s 43(5) - Held that - In this case, it is an undisputed fact that the assessee has not carried out its forward contracts through recognized stock ex....... + More


  17. 2017 (12) TMI 590 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Maruti Udyog Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

    Allowable deduction under Section 43B - Disallowance of the amount deposited by the Appellant in its Central Excise Personal Ledger Account (PLA) before 31st March 2000, i.e. the end of the relevant accounting year - Held that - The Court is of the view that the above decision of this Court in the Assessee s own case for AYs 1995-96 and 1996-97 2012 (12) TMI 671 - DELHI HIGH COURT covers the issue in favour of the Assessee - For the purpose of cl....... + More


  18. 2017 (12) TMI 589 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM

    Meka Rama Murthy, Tuni Versus ITO, Ward-1, Tuni

    Estimation of profit in IMFL business - Held that - Both the parties admitted that under identical circumstances, the ITAT, Visakhapatnam bench consistently adopted profit rate of 5 on purchases, clear of all deductions, as a reasonable profit in IMFL business for the assessment year 2011-12 on account of several factors, such as higher license fees, limitations in selling the liquor at tag price, etc. Facts being identical in this year also, mod....... + More


  19. 2017 (12) TMI 588 - SUPREME COURT

    Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax & Another Versus Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd.

    Validity of Notice u/s 153C - issuance of a notice by an AO of a person who has not been searched, on the basis of a satisfaction note prepared by the AO of a searched person - satisfaction Held that - SLP dismissed. BR BR HC order confirmed 2014 (8) TMI 425 - DELHI HIGH COURT . Mere use or mention of the word satisfaction or the words I am satisfied in the order or the note would not meet the requirement of the concept of satisfaction as used in....... + More


  20. 2017 (12) TMI 587 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    SC Johnson Products Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 22 (2) , New Delhi

    Reassessment notices under Sections 147/148 - scheme of amalgamation - Held that - In the present case, there is no doubt that this court had, while accepting the scheme for amalgamation, facially accepted the method which the assessee indicated. At that stage, neither did the court conduct any detailed inquiry into the question of the appropriateness of the method, nor was it competent to return findings that would have been conclusive. This eve....... + More


  21. 2017 (12) TMI 586 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Dr. R.A. Verma, Medical Officer Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad

    Disallowance of agricultural income - Held that - We find that in the facts of the present case the assessment has been made for the Assessment Year 1998-99 purely on the basis guess work and is not supported by any evidence and material on record. The evidence relied upon by the learned counsel for the revenue in the shape of reply as filed by the assessee cannot constitute an admission on the part of the assessee having indulged in private prac....... + More


  22. 2017 (12) TMI 585 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Kanpur Texel (P) Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Kanpur And Another

    Reopening of assessment - reason to believe - Held that - The reassessment proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2009-10 are barred on two counts i.e. for non-compliance of the first proviso of Section 147; also no tangible material exists in support of the belief recorded by the Assessing Officer that income had escaped assessment. Consequently, reason (to be formed by the assessing authority) that is a sine-qua-no....... + More


  23. 2017 (12) TMI 584 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    Amit Basu Proprietor M/s Global Vision Company Versus The DCIT, Circle-II, NCRB, Statue Circle, Jaipur

    Entitlement to deduction u/s 10BA - denial of claim on the premises that on account of revised return filed by the appellant, it had not claimed exemption u/s 10BA - whether return filed u/s 139(5) is revised return and return filed on 7.5.2008 Annexure-5 can be allowed to be withdrawn vide letter dt. 7.9.2009? - Held that - On a close reading of Sub-Sec.(5) of Sec.139, it is very clear that the legislature has given a chance to the assessee to c....... + More


  24. 2017 (12) TMI 583 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    M/s Vaibhav Global Limited formerly known as Vaibhav Gems Limited Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-II, Jaipur And Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

    Benefit of Section 92B - Held that - Taking into account the observations made in Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vs.ACIT 2011 (12) TMI 227 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT the first issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the department. Tribunal while relying on the international transaction granted benefit of Section 92B to the assessee which is just and proper. BR BR Regarding LIBOR rate plus 2 on account of interest free loans provided by the ap....... + More


  25. 2017 (12) TMI 582 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    Subhash Chandran P Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) And Income Tax Officer, Ward-I (3) , Thiruvananthapuram

    Denial of opportunity of hearing before Ext.P7 order - no response to the notice - stay of recovery of the tax due from the appellant subject to his remitting 50 thereof - Held that - From a reading of Ext.P7, we are not persuaded to accept the contentions because Ext.P7 itself shows that notice dated 16.05.2017 fixing the hearing on 12.06.2017 was issued to the appellant. It is also seen that finding that there was no response to the notice, ano....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 642 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    The Commercial Tax Officer, Ernakulam And The Intelligence Inspector, Squad-III, Thrissur Versus Madhu. M.B., Proprietor, Haritha Enterprises

    Provisional release of detained goods - goods not released on the ground that there were no nexus between the documents accompanied and the actual goods under transport - CGST Act - Held that - When the statute itself provides for a mechanism (for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication), a deviation therefrom cannot be ordered. If that be so, the provisional release in the mann....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 640 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    D. Pauls Travel & Tours Ltd. Versus Union of India & Another

    Input tax credit - credit on SGST charged by the hotels located outside Delhi - Held that - It is pointed that different provisions are applicable in case of online bookings through web travel portals and they are able to avail the credit - The respondents will examine the assertions and so called anomalies. We will be informed on the treatment accorded on sale of manufactured goods and other services which are provided by an assessee across the ....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 515 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Coimbatore Road Contractors Welfare Association Versus State of Tamil Nadu, The Chief Engineer, Chennai, The Regional Officer, Chennai, The Superintending Engineer, Salem And The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai

    Rate of tax of GST - works contract - case of petitioners is that the contract works for which the agreements were executed prior to 01.07.2017, GST cannot be imposed and 2 VAT alone is applicable - Held that - since the petitioner s representations are pending, it is to appropriate for the respondents to respond to the same by giving them a reply. The appropriate person, who would be in a position to give reply, is that the Commissioner of Comme....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 514 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

    Nirmal Constructions Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh

    Cancellation of the tender in which the petitioner participated - change of tax regime - introduction of GST - Held that - Since the entire tax regime has undergone change, therefore, the State Government s decision not to act upon the tenders invited with effect from 1.7.2017 to 5.8.2017 cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary, which may warrant interference of this Court. BR BR In pursuance of the offer of the petitioner, letter of acceptance....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 342 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s M.K. Enterprises Thru' Its Prop. Mukesh Kumar Versus State of U.P. & 3 Others

    UP GST - detention of goods - petitioner was not given any opportunity to show cause or give reply to the allegation on which goods have been seized - goods detained on account of absence of Transit Declaration Form (TDF) - Held that - Inasmuch as the petitioner had no notice or opportunity to explain his conduct with respect to the discrepancy in the Tax Invoice alleged in the seizure order, we consider it proper to set aside the orders passed u....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 341 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Ramdev Trading Company And Another Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others

    Detention of goods - absence of Transit Declaration Form (TDF) - mis-description of goods - Refined Palm Oil - penalty - Section 129(1) of UP GST Act - Held that - at the stage of seizure the detaining authority had not applied his mind, nor formed any opinion as to intention to evade tax. The only allegation made in the seizure order is to the effect that the TDF is absent and that the goods have been mis-described. There is no allegation whatso....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 202 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Sameer Mat Industries And M/s. Kaleel Mat Industries Versus State of Kerala, The Assistant State Tax Officer, Thiruvananthapuram And Fathima Store

    Release of detained goods - Jurisdiction of detaining authority - mis-declaration as well as mis-classification of goods - inter-state or intra-state supply - Held that - the specific power invoked in issuing the impugned notice is under the CGST/SGST which is applicable only to the intra-state movement of goods. Admittedly the petitioner has consigned the goods from Tamil Nadu and was transporting it to the 3rd respondent at Pattambi - The issue....... + More


  8. 2017 (11) TMI 1413 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Hughes And Hughes Chem. Ltd. Versus Union of India And ANR

    Imposition of 12 GST on sanitary napkins - code number which is applicable to a person/service provider who seeks benefit of exemption under Serial No. 3 of the N/N. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) - Held that - This is an aspect for which the petitioner must first get in touch with a specialist on the subject and in case they are unable to get hold of the code, correspond with the respondent Council, who, we are sure would ensure that the requisite ....... + More


  9. 2017 (11) TMI 1032 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Iqra Roadways (India) Thru' Its Prop. & 3 Others Versus State of U.P. & 3 Others

    Detention and seizure of goods - Section 129(1) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 - questions of facts - Held that - in the instant case since the factual disputed issues are involved and further that the penalty proceedings are already initiated, as intimated by the counsel for the State, therefore, it would be proper in the interest of justice that the seized goods be released in favour of the petitioners on the payment of an amount of ₹ 1,11,564....... + More


  10. 2017 (11) TMI 1022 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Radhey Lal Jaiprakash Neadarganj Dadri Versus State Of U.P. And 5 Others

    Non-filing of GST Registration within the stipulated time - Held that - The provisional ID and password allotted to the petitioner for the purposes of GST is not working - it is provided that no coercive action would be taken against the petitioner for not filing the GST return within the time stipulated........ + More


  11. 2017 (11) TMI 1021 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Annapurna International Versus State Of U.P. & 5 Others

    Cancellation of GST Registration - Held that - the copy of the order has not been supplied and that no notice or opportunity of hearing was given before cancelling the registration - In the absence of any order of the cancellation on record, we find it difficult to proceed in the matter........ + More


  12. 2017 (11) TMI 809 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Nila Infrastructure Limited & 1 Versus Surat Municipal Corporation & 1

    Disqualification of petitioner - petitioner s bid treated as nonresponsive and ineligible on the sole ground that while submitting the bid the petitioner no.1 has not paid Goods and Services Tax to the respondent with the Bid/ Document Fee - at the time of submitting bid the petitioners made the payment of ₹ 18000/towards bid / document fees, however without GST 18 as demanded as per the tender document / notice - It is the case on behalf o....... + More


  13. 2017 (11) TMI 731 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Aphro Ecommerce Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India & Others

    Interpretation of statute - requirement of furnishing of Bond with bank guarantee or filing of LUT- Rule 96A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - Circular No. 4/4/2017 - Held that - Respondent Nos. 2 and 4, has produced before the Court, Notification No. 37/2017-Central Tax, dated 4th October 2017, issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, whereby the grievance of the Petitioner in the present petition no longer survives -....... + More


  14. 2017 (10) TMI 1017 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Modern Pipe Industries Versus State Of U.P. & 5 Others

    Access to registration certificate of partnership firm - case of appellant is that even though the G.S.T. ID/ password for a partnership firm has been provided to the petitioner, but on logging with the said ID/password, he is not able to access the registration certificate of his partnership firm which is migrated to G.S.T. - Held that - respondent may seek instructions if any arrangement has been made to resolve such kind of problems........ + More


  15. 2017 (10) TMI 881 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Jaap Auto Distributors Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Customs

    Jurisdiction under GST - determination of rate of IGST on import of goods - Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - case of petitioner is that the respondent is neither a proper officer nor an adjudicating authority as defined and contemplated under the CGST Act or the IGST Act - Held that - a Writ Court cannot make a fact finding exercise to ascertain, which would be an appropriate entry under which the goods are to be class....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 614 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem Versus M/s. Swathi Institute of Computer Technology

    Photography Service - production of Electors Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) in various districts of Tamil Nadu - whether the issue of EPICs can be considered as photography services? - Held that - The production of EPICs involve capturing of photographic images of identified electors, resizing of images, linking of images with the electoral rolls data base, printing of photo rolls as per Election Commission of India guidelines throughout the Distric....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 605 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Kodai Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE & ST, Madurai

    Levy of service tax - labour charges collected for the services rendered in other three branches - case of appellant is that the manufacturer viz., MML has not given any permission for conduct of authorized service stations in the places Dindigul, Theni and Karaikudi and therefore the amounts collected toward labour charges in these branches cannot be subject to levy of service tax under the category of Authorized Service Station services - Held ....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 596 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Lavino Kapur Cottons P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-II

    Interest on refund - Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944 - case of appellant is that when the refund applications were filed on the respective dates in respect of the amounts stated in the Table, such refund not being granted by the Authority below, it is entitled to interest - Held that - Bare perusal of the statutory provision in Section 11BB of the Act throws light that Section 11BB comes into operation only after an order of refund has b....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 555 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s B.E.C. Fertilizers Versus CCE, Raipur

    Refund claim - time limitation - Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that - Since, the statutory provision mandates filing of refund application within one year from the relevant date, the time limit prescribed thereunder was to be strictly adhered to by the authorities functioning under the statute - In this case, admittedly, the refund application was filed beyond the period of one year from the relevant date. Thus, the said appl....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 554 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Aksh Technologies Ltd Versus CCE & ST Jaipur-I

    Services with reference to public offer of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB) and Global Depository Receipts (GDR)- Revenue held a view that appellants are liable to pay service tax for availing such services under the category of banking and offered financial services (BOFS) on reverse charge basis - Business Auxiliary Services - Held that - There is nothing on record to show that the fund mobilization has exclusively been assigned to the....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 553 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Manorma Creation, M/s Shiv Engineering Works, M/s Arun and Company, M/s Ever Bright Builders, M/s United Construction Co. Versus CCE & ST, Jaipur–I

    Erection, commissioning or installation service - Composite contract or otherwise - Held that - the legal principal that composite works contract are liable to be taxed under Finance Act, 1994 only w.e.f. 01/06/2007 is a well settled - Hon ble Supreme Court in Larsen & Toubro Ltd. 2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT has held that the service tax liability will not arise prior to 01/06/2007. BR BR Composition scheme - Held that - the value of fre....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 552 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. ANS Constructions Ltd. Versus C.S.T., Delhi And (Vice-Versa)

    Liability of service tax - activity of the appellant of production and supply of RMC - Held that - the appellants are engaged in production and supply of RMC. Necessarily such production and supply at site requires the equipments relevant to the same. Considering the nature of RMC, the same are to be supplied and used immediately. Use of equipments for due delivery of RMC in the required site in a manner as required by the client, will not make t....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 509 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Bombay Hospital & Medical Research Centre, Appollo Hospitals, M/s Max Health Care Institute Ltd Versus CCE Delhi-I, CCE&ST Indore, CCE&ST Raipur, CST New Delhi And CST Delhi Versus M/s Indraprastha Medical Corporation Ltd

    Business Support Services - collection charges/facilitation fee - sharing of infrastructure with the doctors - Doctors are provided space in the hospitals with required facilities to attend to the patients coming to the hospitals, run by the appellants. These doctors engaged on contract basis are paid professional fee in terms of the contracts. - Held that - there is no taxable activity identifiable in the present arrangement for tax liability of....... + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 508 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s. USV Ltd Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumba

    Reverse charge mechanism - case of the department is that appellant have received various services from foreign based service providers - Held that - As regard the correct quantification of the demand, this issue being purely matter of fact, need to be verified from the records - no proper findings on the discrepancies were given - matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order after verification of the above re-quantific....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 507 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Sar Parivahan Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE & ST, Bhopal

    Cenvat credit on capital goods - Rule 2(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that - during the material time, defined inputs to mean all goods, except light diesel, high diesel oil, motor spirit, commonly known as petrol and motor vehicles used for providing any output service. Since the definition of input at the material time was broad enough to consider all goods, excepting the exceptions contained therein, Cenvat credit taken on tyres by th....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 506 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Indian Hotel Co. Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Jaipur

    Non-payment of service tax - commission amount paid to the foreign travel agent - reverse charge mechanism - Held that - The fact is not under dispute that whenever the foreign tourists planned to visit India, they approached the overseas agents for necessary guidance for booking of accommodation in India - the appellant is not in the picture as far as receipt of any taxable service from the overseas clients is concerned. Since the services were ....... + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 452 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Country Club Hospitability & Holidays Ltd. Versus Union of India & Others

    Jurisdiction - power of Settlement Commission to reject an application - case of petitioner was that the application cannot be rejected subsequent to the stage of subsection 1 of section 32-F on the ground of bar created by section 32-O. Paragraph 9 is exactly to the contrary - penalty - Held that - section 32-O creates a bar for entertaining subsequent application for settlement. It provides that the bar will be attracted if there is an impositi....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 451 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s N.R. Management Consultants India (P) Ltd Versus CST New Delhi And Vice-Versa

    Liability of service tax - export of service or not? - the service is received by the foreign based client and consideration is received by the appellant-assesses inconvertible foreign exchange - Held that - It is clear that though the data information and other analysis is collected and done by the appellant-assesses in India, the same is in terms of an agreement with a foreign based company. The foreign based client paid consideration inconvert....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 450 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Ajay Machine Tools Versus CCE, New Delhi

    Non-payment of service tax - Management Maintenance or Repair Service - Erection Commissioning and Installation Service - validity of SCN - Held that - We are not in the agreement with proposition that the appellants can be allowed to take advantage of their own action of non-cooperation with the revenue. In any case they have participated in proceedings before the Original Authority by submitting all the contract documents which resulted in the ....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 449 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Shri Padam Charan Guman Singh Versus C.C.E. & S.T., Raipur

    Jurisdiction - whether the Commissioner (Appeals) is empowered to consider the fresh issues for the first time as per the provisions of Rule 5 of Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001? - Held that - It is the fact that the issues involved in the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeal) relate to both question of facts as well as the point of limitation, which is a question of law. Since both the aspects are involved in this appeal, the appellant ca....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 643 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Tamilnadu Paints & Allied Products Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai

    Benefit of SSI Exemption - Classification of goods - Road Marking Paints - classified under CETA 3210.90 or under CETA 3208.90? - case of appellant is that they are eligible for SSI exemption as prevalent during the impugned period, in which case they claim that there shall be no duty liability since all their clearances will be within the exempted turn over limits - Held that - appellants have accepted the CETA classification of 3208.90 in respe....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 638 - SIKKIM HIGH COURT

    Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited Formally known as Sun Pharma Drugs Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Union of India, The Commissioner Central Excise Customs and Service Tax, The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Gangtok Division, Siliguri

    Area Based Exemption - doctrine of promissory estoppel - notifications whittling down the exemption benefits - It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner started investing for setting up its first unit from the year 2005 only. Evidently therefore, the Petitioner had started the investment only after issuance of impugned Notification No. 27/2004 amending N/N. 56/2003 which notification put into operation the Industrial Policy, 2003. The ....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 627 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Varmora Foods Pvt. Ltd. & 1 Versus Union of India & 2

    Refund claim - amount deposited under coercion - Held that - the department cannot hold on any amount from the assessee, which the department has no authority in law to retain. If the petitioners had disputed the duty liability at the very outset and promptly taken up the issue with the authorities immediately, the question of the department s authority to withhold such amount would rest on entirely different considerations. The facts of the pres....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 622 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Shree Bhagwan Fabrics Ltd. (Formerly known as M/s. Visen Fabrics) Versus The Union of India, The Commissioner of Central Excise & The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai III

    Validity of Rule 96ZQ of the CER, 1944 - petitioner has claimed a declaration that Rule 96ZQ of the CER, 1944 is illegal and null and void and is liable to be struck down - Held that - In the case of Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills 2015 (11) TMI 1172 - SUPREME COURT , the Apex Court has held that Rule 96ZQ is invalid - the order imposing penalty in exercise of powers under Rule 96ZQ of the said Rules cannot be sustained - penalty set aside - a....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 617 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Tansi Engineering Works, Tansi Project Cell Versus Commissioner of Central Excise

    Waste and scrap - excisability - it appeared that appellant had removed a quantity of 22,790 MT of waste and scrap which had arisen during the course of manufacture of finished goods to one Kanishk Steel Industries without payment of excise duty - Department took the view that such waste and scrap that have arisen during the course of manufacture are excisable and dutiable - SSI Exemption - Held that - The department has only found fault with the....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 610 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Lakshmi Card Clothing Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals) , Coimbatore

    Classification of goods - Traverse Assembly - Flat Drive Reversal System - whether classified under CTH 84.48 or otherwise? - Held that - The lower appellate authority in para-3 of the impugned order has gone into detail into the performance and functioning of each of these impugned items. He has correctly observed that it is not the case that these items are sent along with a new carding machine, but that they are actually being sent separately ....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 608 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Western Fresh Ltd. Versus CCE & ST, Madurai

    Interpretation of statute - whether the phrase intended for storage of agricultural produce can be interpreted as intended for exclusive storage of agricultural produce only? - Held that - The Hon ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Dalmia Dadri Cement Ltd. 1987 (11) TMI 94 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA had gone into the interpretation of the term for use and had concluded that the term only means intended for use and that if the legisl....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 607 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Mitsuba Sical India Ltd. Versus CCE, Chennai

    CENVAT credit - removal of moulds to other manufacturers (other than the job workers) for production of goods without reversing the credit availed on such moulds - Rule 3 (5) of CCR, 2004 - Held that - The Hon ble High Court in the case of CCE, Pondicherry Vs. Whirlpool of India Ltd. 2014 (9) TMI 717 - MADRAS HIGH COURT had analysed the issue whether it is necessary for the purpose of sub-rule 8 of Rule 57 S of CER, 1944, that raw materials shoul....... + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 606 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Saranya Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., Shri R. Periyasamy, Shri P Ashok Kumar, Shri R. Thangavel Versus CCE & ST, Salem

    Clandestine Removal - main allegation raised against the appellants is that they did not have reeling machines which were fully functional during the disputed period and that they were clearing only cone yarn in the guise of hank yarn to evade payment of central excise duty - Held that - the department has not been able to establish clandestine clearances of the finished products on the part of the appellants - In Continental Cement Company Vs. U....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 604 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Walltracts India Pvt. Ltd., Shri Arun R. Jausuja, General Manager Versus CCE Delhi-II

    Manufacture or service - whether the presented goods are considered as excisable goods liable to payment of excise duty or the whole process is to be considered as a service in which certain goods are supplied during the course of rendering service? - Held that - Since the fabric is fixed to the aluminum tube in the factory as also the motor in certain cases, therefore, the blinds can be said to have come into existence in the factory premises. S....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 603 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Genius Electrical And Electronics Pvt Ltd., M/s. Sattvik Industries, M/s. Asha Chemicals Versus C.C.E. New Delhi-II

    CENVAT credit - fake invoices - Department found that the machines installed in the factory premises of M/s. Satvik Industries and the number of employees were insufficient to manufacture the PVC insulated wire and winding wire of copper that is their final product - Held that - The expression reversal of credit is normally used when wrong credit is reversed by debit in the cenvat credit account without issue of any invoice. The expression is als....... + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 602 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Kunsons Metals Limited, Vimal Kumar Jain Versus CCE, Jaipur-I

    Benefit of N/N. 214/86-CE dated 25.03.1988 - denial on the ground that no excise duty was paid on the final products manufactured out of job worked goods by the principal manufacturer - Held that - The specified goods manufactured in a factory as a job work are exempt when they are used in relation to the manufacture of the final products on which duty of excise is leviable in whole or in part - Admittedly, the final products which are manufactur....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 601 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Agarwal Plastic (India) , Rajeev Aggarwal Versus CCE, Delhi-II

    Condonation of delay in filing appeal - the appellant never informed the department about change of address after closing of the factory - Held that - a person cannot take advantage of his wrongs as per the maxim COMMODUM EX INJURIA SUA MEMO HABERE DEBET - the assessee-appellant has never informed the department about the change of address. Earlier also appellant was not serious about the show cause notice. There is no proper explanation in the p....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 597 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Orient Steel Re-rolling Mills. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur

    Clandestine removal - Whether for some discrepancy found in the quantity of stock of raw material and finished goods, than the recorded balance in the register, whether duty and penalty are being rightly imposed along with confiscation of the goods found in excess, and further order for release of goods on payment of redemption fine is tenable in the facts and circumstances of the case? BR BR Held that - no actual weighment of the stock of raw ma....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 594 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    C.C.E., Raipur Versus M/s. Jindal Steel And Power Ltd.

    Refund claim - unjust enrichment - Held that - there is no dispute on the fact that refund was payable to the respondent on merit - even in the case of captive consumption the unjust enrichment will be applicable as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. Solar Pesticide Pvt. Ltd. 2000 (2) TMI 237 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue........ + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 628 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Shri Ram Trading Company Versus The Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, The Deputy Commissioner of Customs

    Provisional Release of goods - Section 110 (A) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that - The factual matrix of the present case appears to be not in dispute, as the allegation was not pertaining to mis disclaration of the nature of the goods, but with regard to retail selling price of the products. Thus, if ultimately, on adjudication, it is found that that the retail selling price declared by the petitioner, in the Bill of Entry is lower than the a....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 624 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Blessing Cargo Care Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Customs

    Suspension of CHA License - Regulation 19(2) of the Customs Broker Licencing Regulation 2013 (CBLR) - the allegation against the petitioner in the instant case is that they have contravened Regulation 11(d) & Regulation 11(e). In as much as the petitioner did not advice their client to comply with the provisions of the Act and failed to exercise due diligence to ascertain the correctness of the information and even assuming ultimately, an ord....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 616 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Commissioner of Customs, (Import) , Chennai Versus M/s. Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd.

    Quantum of redemption fine and penalty - Import of vehicle - Department was of the view that necessary Type Approval Certificate have not been produced and the conditions have not been complied with - Held that - the commissioner has observed that substantial part of the conditions in Sl. No. 2 of ITC (HS) Policy to Chapter 87 has been complied and only the conditions (b) and (c) of the said policy have not been complied. There is no dispute that....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 564 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Ruchi Infrastructure Limited Versus Government of India & 1

    Effective date of notification - petitioner has prayed for a declaration that the Notification No. 43 of 2010 dated 09.04.2010 granting the exempt from payment of customs duty came to withdrawn become effective only from 20.04.2010 and not earlier and therefore, cannot be applied to the shipping bills of the petitioner for which let orders were issued by the authorities before such date. BR BR Held that - it is an admitted position that the shipp....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 563 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Macnair Exports Pvt. Ltd., H.R. Bhatt, Shri Firoz Hajiani Versus Commissioner of Customs (EP) , Mumbai

    DEEC Scheme - Appellant falsely claimed that M/s Watan Tanning Industries Pvt. Ltd., (WTIPL), was supporting manufacturer of the appellant making use of the imports made by it. When investigation was made, WTIPL was found to be non-existent - Held that - Appellant no where brought out existence of any machinery or infrastructure facility of its own carrying out manufacturing activity. Nor it proved existence of manufacturing facility of supportin....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 513 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

    Smt Siva Suma latha Ranga Reddy (Distt) , Smt Masetty Krishna Kumari, Smt Rudrangi Radhika Versus Commissioner of Customs, Hyderabad

    Smuggling - Gold Strip (Vaddanam) worn on their waist - It was alleged that the Appellants attempted to smuggle the same and thus the impugned goods are liable for confiscation - Baggage Rules - Held that - the Appellants were wearing the gold strips i.e Vaddanam on their waist and the same was not carried by them in their baggage. However the same was not disclosed to the officers and after enquiry by the officers the same was revealed to the of....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 512 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    M/s Gujarat Ambuja Export Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar

    100 EOU - Conversion of shipping bills - free-shipping bill into DEPB shipping bill - Held that - conversion of free shipping bill into DEPB shipping bills, through amendment as provided under Sec. 149 of CA,1962, is inadmissible and has been rightly rejected by the authorities below - reliance placed in the case of Arise Exports, Trident Creation Versus C.C., Ahmedabad 2017 (8) TMI 145 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - appeal dismissed - decided against appe....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 511 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s Oriental Trimex Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida

    Benefit of N/N. 4/2006 - Classification of imported goods - Polished Marble Slabs - classified under CTH 68 02 2110 or under CTH 680221 90? - Held that - the notification mentions only 6802 2110 and does not mention 6802 2190 - vide Circular No. DOF. No. 334/03/2012-TRU, dated 16.03.2012 the Board has clarified that Polished Marble Slabs are classifiable under CTH 6802 2190 and the benefit of Notification No.4/2006-CE, dated 01.03.2006 is availab....... + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 463 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Vardhman Textiles Limited, M/s Arvind Limited, M/s Indorama Industries Limited, M/s Hyosung Vietnam Co. Ltd., M/s Hyosung Corporation Versus Union of India/DA

    ADD - Elastomeric Filament Yarn (EFY) - import from China PR, Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam (subject countries) - It is claimed that there is no injury to the DI and there is no reason for imposition of AD duty. The thrust of the argument is that the DI is doing well and is having good commercial return and there is no apparent injury caused to the DI due to import of the subject goods - Held that - There is no ground to support the claim of the appe....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 462 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Devashish Polymers Private Limited Versus Union of India & Ors.

    Exemption from customs and excise duty - continuation of exemption under GST regime - continuation of exemption until the validity of registration granted to the petitioner s R&D centre - Held that - This Court is prima facie of the view that an exemption cannot be claimed as a matter of right in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Parameswaran Match Works 1974 (11) TMI 40 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA . BR BR The petitione....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 461 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Century Rayon Versus The Commissioner of Customs (Imports)

    Refund claim - duty paid under protest - claim of the appellant on the basis of proviso to subsection (1) of Section 20 of the said Act was that the benefit of the proviso will be available and no duty will be payable on reimported goods - It is alleged that in absence of the failure to establish identity at the time of importation, benefit of the proviso could not be made available - Held that - Sub-Section (1) of Section 20 lays down the rule w....... + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 460 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Shri Pramod Kumar Versus C.C., New Delhi

    Classification of goods - unbranded Micro SD Cards - classified under CTH 85235220 or CTH 85235100? - Held that - the CBEC vide Circular dated 20.07.2016 has also clarified that the benefit of the said notification is extendable to Micro/Mini SD cards classified under CTH 85235100. Thus, it is apparent that change in classification of subject goods by the Department will not create any additional Basic Customs Duty liability for the appellant - t....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 459 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Jeevan Jain Versus C.C., New Delhi (Prev.)

    Penalty u/s 114AA of the CA, 1962 - imposition of penalty on the ground that the premises of the appellant showed that the goods were clandestinely diverted by him to M/s. ESS ESS Traders, which were imported under the cover of Bill of Entry dated 29.11.2012 - Held that - it cannot be said that the appellant had provided certain false or incorrect material in relation to such import. Further, the Department was also in doubt as to the persons, wh....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 458 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

    Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Guntur Versus M/s Vikas Agro Products

    Classification of goods - micronutrients - Department has a taken a view that the goods merit classification under CETH 38.08 as Plant Growth Regulator, whereas the respondents claim classification as other fertilizers under CETH 31.05 - Held that - the issue has already been settled in the case of CCE & ST, Hyderabad-IV Versus M/s Aries Agrovet Industries Ltd 2017 (7) TMI 289 - CESTAT HYDERABAD , where it was held that In view of presence of....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 457 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Mr. Rajeev Banga Versus CC, (Prev.) , New Delhi

    Penalty - smuggling of Ketamine concealing into the tobacco packet - Held that - it is crystal clear that it is a case of the drugs export, Ketamine which is injurious to the health. It is subject matter of the Narcotics and Drugs Act. The main offender, as usual, absconded so the appellant cannot escape from his liability especially when he has confessed that he knows the CFA exporter and the item to be exported. The Commissioner (Appeals) has a....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 635 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    State of Gujarat Versus Dipak Enterprise

    Penalty - whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the revisional authority was justified in levying penalty under section 34(7) of the GVAT Act? - Held that - The revisional authority in the order passed under section 75 of the GVAT Act has imposed penalty under section 34(7) of the said Act. Sub-section (7) of section 34 of the GVAT Act provides for imposing penalty after affording the dealer an opportunity of being heard - Evidently....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 629 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Bhambhani Shipping Ltd. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others

    Maintainability of appeal- whether against the impugned order, an appeal is maintainable under Section 27 of the MVAT Act, 2002? - Held that - In the present case, the order impugned has been passed on the application for stay made by the petitioner in the pending appeals. While deciding such application, no issue could be finally decided or concluded and only a prima facie consideration of the controversy involved in the appeal is required to be....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 626 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    AB Mauri India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Burns Philip India Pvt. Ltd.) Versus The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, The Commercial Tax Officer

    Rate of tax - cake gel - taxable at 4 or 12 ? - Held that - The general rule pertaining to classification of a product is to see as to whether the product will fall under any of the specific entry, which specifically prescribe a product and when the product does not fall under any of the specific entry, the Authority would be justified in classifying the product under the residual or general entry - Though the petitioner had approached the first ....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 623 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund Versus The State of Maharashtra

    Whether after constituting a Bench of three members in terms of Sub-Section (6) of Section 11 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 the learned President of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal could have passed an order that reference to a Bench of three members was unwarranted and whether the learned President could have alone disposed of the Appeal on merits? BR BR Held that - In the present case, the roznama shows that though after heari....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 621 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    The State of Tamilnadu, rep. by the Joint Commissioner (CT) Versus Habib Leather Manufacturing Co.

    Concessional rate of duty - Assessing Officer was of the view that there was no manufacturing activity involved in conversion of wet blue hides into finished leather and hence, the dealers were not eligible to purchase chemical against Form XVII at concessional rate - Held that - Issue in the present case is covered by a decision of this Court in Golden Leathers v. Secretary, TNSTAT, 2010 (4) TMI 535 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , wherein, a Hon ble Divis....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 619 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Wonderla Holidays Ltd. Versus The State of Karnataka, Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

    Benefit of Composition Tax - dealer selling Liquor - denial on the ground that as per Rule 135(4) of the KVAT Rules, 2005, a Dealer selling liquor is not entitled to have the benefit of composition of tax under Section 15 of the Act - Held that - The petitioner-assessee is admittedly selling liquor in one of its Units or Divisions namely, 3-Star Hotel run by it. The petitioner also holds a common registration number with the Respondent-Department....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 537 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Indian Coffee Workers Co-operative Society Ltd. Versus The Joint Commissioner (CT) , The Commercial Tax Officer

    Defective application - application for waiver of penalty - Exemption from payment of tax - Held that - In somewhat similar circumstances, the Hon ble Division Bench in the case of Chetak Timber Products (P) Ltd., vs. Joint Commissioner and another 2014 (9) TMI 72 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , held that when there is a defective application, the Designated Authority should return the application for rectification. BR BR The reason assigned by the first r....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 312 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    New Mount Trading & Investment Co. Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner Grade-I Commercial Tax & Anr.

    Validity of reassessment proceeding - Section 29 of the U.P. VAT Act, 2007 - interpretation of statute reason to believe - escapement from tax - deemed sale of construction material - Held that - the jurisdiction to reassess the petitioner could arise under Section 29 only if after the petitioner s assessing authority records a valid reason to believe as is the requirement of the Act itself - it cannot be gain said that at present merely a show c....... + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 264 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Sinicon Controls [P] Ltd. Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Palakkad, State of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, Inspecting Asst. Commissioner, Department Of Commercial Taxes, Palakkad And Union Bank Of India, Kannur

    Exemption from CST - disallowance of export sales - demand on the ground that on the ground that the petitioner did not produce documents to show that he had realised the proceeds of the export sale in foreign currency, in India - Held that - there is no provision under the Act or Rules which mandates that the petitioner should produce a document showing realisation of export proceeds as a condition for claiming the exemption that is available fo....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 263 - TELANGANA & ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

    M/s. Varun Tech Industries Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh And Others

    Validity of assessment order - time limitation - APVAT Act - case of petitioner is that out of the block period of 1.9.2005 to 31.3.2012, the period of 1.9.2005 to March 2009 falls beyond the limitation period of four years, that therefore respondent No.4 had no jurisdiction to pass such an order and that, as the power exercised by respondent No.4 is without jurisdiction - case of Revenue is that the writ petition was filed bypassing the effectiv....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 205 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Blue Star Limited Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, The Special Commissioner & Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, The Commercial Tax Officer

    Waiver of assessment procedure - fire accident occurred in the business premises of the petitioner on 11.01.2002 - petitioner s case is that on account of the fire accident, entire records, books of accounts, etc. which were kept in the office premises were gutted down and are not available with the petitioner for production before the Assessing Officer and therefore, requested for waiver of the assessment procedure - Held that - nothing appears ....... + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 204 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Subhyog Steels Ltd. Versus The Commercial Tax Officer

    Jurisdiction - time limitation - whether the first respondent, in exercise of his powers under Section 32 of the TNGST Act, while purporting to pass orders of assessment could do so, beyond the period of limitation stipulated under Section 16 of the TNGST Act, 1959? - Held that - the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Salem Steel Suppliers and others vs. The Deputy Commissioner an....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 203 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Maurya Motors Versus The Commercial Tax Officer

    Penalty on entry tax - Section 15 of the Entry Tax Act - Held that - Section 15(1) of the Entry Tax Act could be invoked only when a person, who is liable to pay tax under the Entry Tax Act, fails to comply with any of the provisions of the Entry Tax Act, and if he fails to do so, he is liable to pay penalty not exceeding finalised amount of tax - On a reading of the impugned assessment order, it is not clear as to how the respondent imposed pena....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 3 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    International Flavours & Fragrances India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT)

    Reversal of input tax credit - TNVAT Act - computation of taxable turnover - liability of interest - Held that - it is the endeavour of the petitioner to state that the respondent committed a serious error in clubbing turnover under the CST Act and to draw the inference that the taxable turnover has exceeded ₹ 200 Crores and therefore, returns filed by them are belated and the petitioner is liable for payment of interest - with regard to Ru....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 2 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    The State of Tamilnadu rep. by the Joint Commissioner (CT) Versus Baron Power Ltd.

    Rate of tax - purchase turnover - TNGST Act - purchases of raw materials, availing concessional rate of tax, under Section 3(3) of the TNGST Act, 1959, by issue of Form XVII declaration and used them in the manufacture of goods and effected export sales - taxable under Section 3(3) of the TNGST Act, 1959 or under Section 3(4) of the TNGST Act, 1959? - Held that - In State of Tamil Nadu v. Essar Inc., 2014 (8) TMI 935 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , while c....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 636 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Vision Millennium Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/s. Stride Multitrade Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Addax Trading Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Nova Trading Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Imperial Mark Trade (India) Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Utility Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vishal Victory Oiltech Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Frame Impex Pvt. Ltd., Arcadia Trading Pvt. Ltd. Amd Sear Trading Pvt. Ltd.

    Deposit of the amounts contained in the statutory notice - Held that - Merely because the Petitioner did not enter into correspondence though breach was committed by the Respondent would not dent the case of the Petitioner in so far as their claim based on Soyabean Meal contracts is concerned. Since the parties had a running business relationship, it may be possible that the parties were trying to work out and in the said process time might have ....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 562 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD

    K. Sashidhar Versus Kamineni Steel, Hyderabad, Indian Bnak, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Karur Vysya Bank, Central Bank of India, Indian Overseas Bank, Andhra Bank, Bank of Maharastra And Allahabad Bank, Hyderabad

    Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) - Held that - It is not in dispute that IBC is the only alternative available to resolve insolvency and Bankruptcy for debts of any Financial Creditor/Operational Creditor, under sections 7, 8, 9 & 10 of the Code. The Contentions of 3 dissenting Bankers as they would resort to other legal proceedings under other laws to recover the dues from the Corporate Debtor is nothing but non-application of ....... + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 561 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

    Shri Praveen Kumar Singh And Shri Lalit Kumar Singh Varanasi Versus Medinimata Agro Products Pvt Ltd., Shri Sacidanand Ojha, Ms Gomti Ojha, Shri PremPrakash Shukia, The Registrar of Companies And The Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi

    Oppression and mismanagement - illegal removal of appellants from their directorship from the 1st Respondent Company - Held that - In the light of the submissions made by the respondent that the payment has been made and the instrument for transfer of shares having been signed by the appellant, it is only a matter of time when the shares will be transferred from the appellant to the respondent and once the shares have been transferred and have be....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 560 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

    Anra Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Versus A. Ramasubbu

    Transfer of cases pending before the Company Law Board to the Tribunal - Transfer of certain pending proceedings - Held that - Admittedly, no petition under Sections 433, 439 and 450 of the Companies Act, 1956 was maintainable before the erstwhile Company Law Board and it was maintainable before the Hon ble High Court. For the said reason, the case pending before the Hon ble High Court under Section 433 were transferred to the Adjudicating Author....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 510 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    India Awake For Transparency Versus Union of India Rep. By Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs And Anr.

    Directions for strict enforcement of the Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Rules, 2016 by every company transferring shares to the second respondent (the Investor Education and Protection Fund) and ensure that officials transferring the shares are made responsible for due certification of compliance with the Rules - Held that - What is clear is that the combined effect of the first and secon....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 455 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited Versus State of Gujarat And Ors.

    Rehabilitation by giving financial assistance - whether the sanctioned scheme in this case was binding on the States of Gujarat and Maharashtra as far as UCIL s claim for refund of VAT/Sales Tax and electricity duty in terms of clauses 12.1 and 12.2 - Held that - As is evident from Section 19(4) of SICA, it is in the absence of consent by any person, the Board may adopt such other measures including the winding up of the sick industrial company a....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 454 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

    Speculum Plast Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Versus PTC Techno Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

    Limitation Act, 1963 applicability for triggering Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Held that - In view of the settled principle, while we hold that the Limitation Act, 1963 is not applicable for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process , we further hold that the Doctrine of Limitation and Prescription is necessary to be looked into for determining the question whether the applicatio....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 453 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD

    Ganpatbhai K. Patel Versus Saibaba Surfactants Pvt. Ltd.

    Oppression and mismanagement - whether there was due diligence on the part of the applicant petitioner? - Held that - According to the applicant petitioner, he has got knowledge of appointment of respondent No. 3 as Director only after he made part inspection of record on 29.07.2016. The facts appearing on record is glaringly different. Respondent No. 3 is Director of the first respondent company from 02.05.2015 and relevant forms have been filed....... + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 399 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

    Labdhi Enterprises Versus Baramati Agro Pvt. Limited

    Winding up petition - debtor Company defaulted in making payment - Held that - Appellant had not submitted all the information other than information forming part of the records of the transferred case, as required in terms of first proviso to Rule -5 aforesaid, we hold that the Application under Sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act which was transferred to the Tribunal stood abated in view of Rule 5 aforesaid. However, in view of the S....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 398 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

    Rajesh Arora Versus MY Agro Pvt. Ltd.

    Corporate insolvency procedures - proof of existing debt - Held that - From the statement made by the Operational Creditor it is clear that the demand notice issued to the Corporate Debtor at its registered office and to the Director(s) were returned unserved. Notices were served only to the Company Secretary and to one ex-Director, Mr. Shyam Poddar. Though such specific statement has been made by the Operational Creditor in the application under....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 397 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI

    M/s. CMI Energy India Private Limited Versus M/s. Easun Reyrolle Limited

    Corporate insolvency process - existence of dispute - Held that - There does not exist any dispute between the parties under the meaning and definition of section 5(3) of the IB Code, 2016 as the aforesaid civil suit is nowhere connected to instant petition. The instant petition pertains to insolvency proceedings whereas the civil suit filed before High Court belongs to recovery of money. Moreover, this Adjudicating Authority is of the opinion th....... + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 392 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Anandram Developers Private Limited, Mukundan Vijayan Versus The National Company Law Tribunal, M/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, (ARCIL)

    Corporate insolvency procedures - Held that - An application is admitted, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, a detailed procedure is set out in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and Rules and Regulations have framed. In the light of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, in M/s.Innoventive Industries Ltd. s case (2017 (9) TMI 58 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) which has thread analysed the code, the contention that ....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 338 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    63, Moons Technologies Limited (formerly Financial Technologies (India) Ltd. & Ors. Versus The Union of India & Ors.

    Compulsory amalgamation of allegedly loss making wholly owned subsidiary (NSEL) with its profit making holding company (FTIL) in public interest - Whether the impugned order was made in violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play? - Held that - In this case, proceeding on the basis that the impugned order is an administrative or at the highest a quasi judicial order as urged by the petitioners, we find that there was no breach in....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 337 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

    Mr. Senthil Kumar Karmegam Versus Dolphin Offshore Enterprises (Mauritius) Pvt. Ltd. And Unison Engineering & Construction Private Ltd.

    Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - authority of advocate issuing notice - Held that - In the present case as the demand notice has been given by an advocate and there is nothing on record to suggest that the advocate in question holds any position with or in relation to the respondent - Dolphin Offshore Enterprises (Mauritius) Pvt. Ltd. and the demand notice has not been issued in mandatory Form 3 or Form 4, as stipulated, under Rule 5 of ....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 336 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA

    Parker Hannifin India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Prowess International Pvt. Limited

    Corporate insolvency procedure - Held that - The Operational Creditor who has initiated this Insolvency Proceeding has also sent mail to the Corporate Debtor for closing the Insolvency Proceeding. Other operational creditors whose claim was submitted to the resolution professional, i.e. Poonam Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. has also settled the matter with the corporate debtor and accepted the post-dated cheques on account of the settlement of dues to the....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 396 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Union of India Versus Shri Yogesh Mehta And Another, Sh. Hemal Thakkar

    Revisional jurisdiction under the FERA - Notice of contravention of Section 51 of FERA was taken by the Adjudicating officer within two years from the date of the repeal of FERA - Held that - In the facts of the present case, the appellant is not without a remedy in the sense that a recourse can be taken to the remedies under the Constitution of India. The principle which governs Mimansa interpretation is that if a word or sentence purporting to ....... + More


  2. 2017 (11) TMI 839 - ATFEMA

    Union of India Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi Versus Shri Tasveer Asgar Khan

    Revision petition u/s 19(6) of FEMA against the order of penalty - contentions of the respondent is that revision petition filed by the revisionist is not maintainable as there is no specific provision in the Act - Held that - As gone through provisions of section 16 which provides for appointment of Central Government Officers as at Adjudicating Authority for holding an inquiry for the purpose of imposing any penalty against the respondent. As i....... + More


  3. 2017 (11) TMI 618 - ATFEMA

    Shri P. Narayan Iyer Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

    Non-realisation of export sale proceeds - Proceedings as contemplated under Section 18(2) & 18(3) read with Section 68(1) & 68(2) of FERA - Held that - It is evident that the Appellant joined as Director solely in the capacity of advisory role and was specifically excluded from the day to day operations of the company as evidenced from the correspondence. There cannot be any adverse inference against the Appellant‟s role as to its i....... + More


  4. 2017 (10) TMI 1129 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    Shri D. Venugopal S/o D.V. Prasad, Devas Multimedia Private Limited, Shri M. Umesh Versus The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, The Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement

    Investigation and enquiry into violation of FEMA and the Rules and Regulations - Held that - Any investigation undertaken with an intention to unearth violations of provisions of FEMA cannot be characterized as motivated or malicious merely because before initiation of such proceeding, an award had been passed against the Central Government regarding alleged breach of contract entered into between the Government and the Company. Alleged breach of....... + More


  5. 2017 (10) TMI 909 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Dr. R.N. Gupta Technical Educational Society Versus Union of India

    Registration under Section 12 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 ( FCRA ) rejected - Grant of certificate of registration under FCRA - the respondent is not satisfied that the foreign contribution is not likely to be used for personal gains - petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and has been registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act - Held that - The question whether a society esta....... + More


  6. 2017 (10) TMI 908 - ATFEMA

    M/s. Dinmay Exim Avenue (P) Ltd., Roshni Rawat, Dinesh Chandra Rawat Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

    Review application - Held that - It is pertinent to mention that the order dated 16.07.2016 has not been challenged by the appellant/applicants in the higher court. It has become final. The amount fixed in the said order has not been deposited and it is apparent that the appellants have no intention to deposit the same. BR BR We are of the view that the review application filed by the appellant/review applicant is not maintainable as the applican....... + More


  7. 2017 (10) TMI 461 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Nitin Sandesara Versus Directorate of Enforcement And Ors.

    Detention at the airport at the instance of the Enforcement Directorate - Look Out Circular (LOC) was issued by the Enforcement Directorate - violation of FEMA - Proceedings under PMLA - Held that - In the present case, the LOC does not indicate any credible reason for issuing the same. Plainly, recourse to LOC cannot be taken as a matter of course; restricting the right of a citizen to travel is a serious imposition on his/her fundamental rights....... + More


  8. 2017 (10) TMI 460 - ATFEMA

    M/s. Wadhwa Enterprises, Shri Sanjeev Wadhwa, Shri Rajeev Wadhwa Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

    Condonation of Delay - reason i.e. the premises of the appellant firm lying locked and shifting of residence by the appellants as well as the chamber of the counsel of the appellant has been stated - Held that - As stated earlier, by an order dated 11th May, 2009 this Tribunal had directed the appellants to deposit 20 of their amount of penalty along with submissions of unconditional bank guarantee of remaining 30 within a period of 45 days from ....... + More


  9. 2017 (10) TMI 459 - ATFEMA

    Shri P.R. Ganapathy Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

    Proceedings contemplated under Section 51 of FERA, 1973 - Held that - In the case of Shri Joji Thelliankal, who had acted as an agent to identify NRE account holders, there was no fool proof evidence on record, to establish that Shri Joji Thelliankal received premium amount and thus it was found by the trial court that there is no corroborative evidence except the statements. It was held that no other evidence on the records placed to show that S....... + More


  10. 2017 (10) TMI 352 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s Wood Tech Consultants Private Limited Versus Joint Director of Enforcement Office of The Joint Director of Enforcement, Government of India

    Partially dispensing with deposit of the penalty amount - order passed exercising the power under second proviso to Section 19(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - Held that - It is relevant to state that an appeal would lie to the High Court under Section 35 of the Act on any question of law arising out of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. On the facts of the case, it can t be said that the discretion exercised by the Appe....... + More


  11. 2017 (9) TMI 491 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    M/s. Lord Chloro Alkali Versus Special Director Enforcement Directorate

    Offence under Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - penalty imposed - reason to believe for default - Held that - From the perusal of the SCN, it is clear that the, details furnished by the respondent department in the SCN, were vague and sketchy at best, for the appellant to trace back the contentious transaction of DM16000, which happened eight years back with respect to the time when the first letter was sent to the appellant Company by the ....... + More


  12. 2017 (9) TMI 127 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Rajendra Kumar Patel Versus Union Of India

    Interest on the amount of the Award - Payment of actual rate of interest earned by the respondent on the amount seized and confiscated from the petitioner - accretion to the amount seized from the petitioner - Held that - In the present case it is admitted that the respondent had received interest amounting to ₹1,64,52,470/- on the separate fixed deposit created from the currency seized. However, it is seen that the respondent has paid only....... + More


  13. 2017 (8) TMI 1307 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

    Shabnam Arora Versus Union of India & Anr.

    Detention orders - Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ( COFEPOSA Act ) against the husband of the petitioner - Held that - No ground to interfere with the impugned order oh HC 2017 (7) TMI 73 - DELHI HIGH COURT . SLP dismised. BR BR HC has held that as discussed the role and position of the detenue in the smuggling ring. The detenue was not a mere carrier and was in-charge of the Delhi operations of ....... + More


  14. 2017 (8) TMI 1016 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    N.L. Dubasia & 1 Versus Union of India THR' & 2

    Provision of Section 78 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 and Section 44 of the Act applicability - Held that - The petitioner who had come to India from foreign country, wanted that their NRI Account/FCNR Account may be continued in the same status. It was a kind of privilege claimed. Such status could be accorded only within the permissible parameters and in accordance with law by the Reserve Bank of India. It is difficult to conceiv....... + More


  15. 2017 (8) TMI 756 - ATPMLA

    Suman S. Rana Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

    Forfeiting the properties as order passed under section 7 of the SAFEMA, 1976 - purview of the term associate / relative - connection with alleged illegal activities of the detenu - Held that - The only activities that have been stated in this regard are that the appellant assisted AP-1 to assume the name of Sanjay Srinath Rana and to obtain documents like Ration Card and Passport in the assumed name and that the detenu resided in the residence o....... + More


  1. 2017 (12) TMI 641 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    Gavranjeet Singh @ Gavrana S/o Jarnail Singh, Kanwar Pal Singh S/o Shri Jagtar, Mahendra Singh S/o Hanuman Singh Singh Versus The State of Rajasthan

    Offence under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act - benefit of bail - 199 bottles of Wincerex Cough Syrup were recovered - Held that - This Court is of the opinion that the law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in Mohd. Sahabuddin & Anr. Vs. State of Assam (2012 (10) TMI 1163 - SUPREME COURT) is amply clear, whereby the recovery of cough syrup containing Codeine Phosphate in bail matter was found to be sufficient ground to reject the bail applicat....... + More


  2. 2017 (12) TMI 637 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    D. Ramakrishnan, S/o. Damodarasamy, Chandra Importers Inc. Versus Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau

    Illegal export of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances in commercial quantities - extraction of contents in two hard disks and the report of an expert in Ex.P148 informing calculation details for each substance - Held that - The evidence of PW-1 to the effect that immediately on receipt of Ex.P1 he decided about the house search, in our view, depicts the true state of affairs i.e., as a person authorised, he acted within his own powers u/s........ + More


  3. 2017 (12) TMI 632 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

    Jasvir Singh And Another Versus State of Punjab

    Offence punishable under Section 18 of NDPS Act - factum of recovery of 4 kgs of opium from each of the two accused - Held that - No force in the contention raised on behalf of the appellant regarding non-compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act. BR BR PW-1 SI Avtar Singh and PW-2 HC Rajbir Singh stated consistently regarding the factum of recovery of 4kgs of opium from each of the two accused. PW-3 DSP Amarjit Singh Bajwa in whose presence the accus....... + More


  4. 2017 (12) TMI 630 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, Shan Mohammad & Another Versus State of U.P.

    Offence under NDPS Act - compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act - case of recovery of 05kg and 150gm heroin/smack or even of little more than 1 kg heroin - guilty of charge under Section 21(ii)(C) of NDPS Act - Held that - In view of above position of law, in the case at hand from record it is absolutely clear as recorded in the recovery memo itself and also narrated by PW-1 and PW-5 that accused were apprised only about their rig....... + More


  5. 2017 (12) TMI 620 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Arvind Dubey Versus State of U.P.

    Offence under NDPS Act - accused was found in possession of 500 grams of illegal charas - Held that - Though non-production of Malkhana Register cannot be the sole ground for passing the acquittal order, but the said fact coupled with other evidence on record, may impact adversely the prosecution s case, in case necessary steps are not taken by the prosecution in proving the case against the accused to the hilt. BR BR As mentioned here that it co....... + More


  6. 2017 (12) TMI 618 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Shaukat Ali Versus State of U.P.

    Offence under sections 8/21 of the NDPS Act - Held that - The prosecution has been able to prove on the basis of evidence on record of two eye-witnesses i.e. PW 1 and PW 3 that the accused was arrested on 10/4/2011 at 6.00 AM in front of Maduwadih station near SBI ATM just before Hanuman temple because of his suspicious conduct and when he disclosed that he had illegal heroin, the police party apprised him that he had a right to be searched befor....... + More


  7. 2017 (12) TMI 559 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

    M/s. Oorja Consultants And Anr. Versus Punjab State Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.

    Award under Arbitration proceedings - High Court while setting aside the said award directing to carry out the modifications required by it at the risk and costs of the appellants(respondents firm) and in terms of the agreement, the costs thereafter shall be recovered from the earnest money or pending payment - Held that - The subject matter covered by the aforesaid impugned direction of the High Court was not one of the items of reference to the....... + More


  8. 2017 (12) TMI 558 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Bhoop Singh Versus State & Anr.

    Dishonour of cheques - offence under NI Act - petitioner has stated in his defence that the two cheques as alleged to have been issued to the complainant for discharge of his legal liability was in fact stolen by the complainant from the house of the petitioner as he was on regular visiting terms - delay in lodging the complaint - Held that - Perusal of the record reveals that the complainant in the present case had lodged his complaint on 24.08........ + More


  9. 2017 (12) TMI 557 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Alok Rajgardia Versus State of U.P. And Others

    Offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act - Held that - A contextual analysis of the provisions of Section 145 of the Act leaves no manner of doubt that the special procedure enabling the complainant to give evidence on affidavit notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure is a procedure available only in relation to a complaint for an offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. ....... + More


  10. 2017 (12) TMI 556 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

    Archana Bagle Versus M/s Betul Oil Limited

    Cognizance of offence under Section 138 of NI Act - Held that - This Court is of the considered opinion that it was not necessary for the complainant to allege that even on the date of the issuance of the subsequent cheques the applicant was responsible and in-charge of day-to-day business of the Company. The averments made in paragraph 2 of the complaint are sufficient to proceed against the applicant for an offence under Section 138 of the Nego....... + More


  11. 2017 (12) TMI 395 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

    B. Sunitha Versus The State of Telengana And Anr.

    Proceedings initiated against the appellant u/s 138 of the NI Act - professional misconduct on the part of an advocate - charging fees as percentage of reward - Held that - Mere issuance of cheque by the client may not debar him from contesting the liability. If liability is disputed, the advocate has to independently prove the contract. Claim based on percentage of subject matter in litigation cannot be the basis of a complaint under Section 138....... + More


  12. 2017 (12) TMI 394 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

    Bank of India Versus Yadav Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. And Ors.

    Recovery proceedings - DRT jurisdiction to entertain appeal against the order of the Recovery Officer - Held that - Order of the Recovery Officer makes it clear that the continuance of respondent No. 1 for safeguarding the auctioned property was solely on behalf of auction purchasers and the first respondent s duty as Court Commissioner had ceased to exist on 13.11.2006. After 13.11.2006 or at least after 24.07.2008 (Order of DRT), for the servic....... + More


  13. 2017 (12) TMI 393 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

    Dushyant Dang S/o Shri Ramesh Chand Dang Versus Jairam Das Verma S/o Shri Jagdev Verma

    Dishonour of the cheque - complaint under 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - accrual of cause of action -Held that - While interpreting word cause of action under section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in relation to the commission of an offence or the institution of a complaint, reading of section 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act makes it abundantly clear that the cause of action to institute a complaint comprises ....... + More


  14. 2017 (12) TMI 391 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

    Smt. Chanda Shukla W/o Late Vinod Kumar Shukla Versus Sudhir Pandey S/o Baldau Prasad Pandey

    Dishnour of cheque - cognizance under Section 138 of NI Act - Held that - The averments of the complaint do not disclose about any specific allegation about the role played by the respondent to project that he was also instrumental for issuance of cheque. Predominately the allegations have been attributed against the company itself alone to isolation to others. Therefore, prima facie reading of the complaint do not specify the fact that the plead....... + More


  15. 2017 (12) TMI 335 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    The State of Tamil Nadu, The Collector, Kancheepuram District, The Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department, The Assistant Commissioner (Excise) Versus Hotel Mount Heera, The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.

    Renewal of license denied - application received, after the expiry of the licence period - Held that - Having regard to the orders made in W.P. filed by Harshini Recreation Club, represented by its Secretary against the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Chennai and another, and after, obtaining opinion from the learned Advocate General, the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise (i/c), Chennai has sought for necessary amendment, to Rule 21 ....... + More


 
 
 
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version