|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 229 Records
-
1990 (4) TMI 268 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of final assessment. The purchase vouchers in respect of the disputed turnover also contain check-post seals which go in favour of the appellant.............. If that be so, there is no justification for making the assessee liable for 50 per cent of the turnover in dispute. We are inclined to think that the Tribunal has accepted the case of the assessee that his seller was the first seller of wheat products and, therefore, he is not liable to tax. If that be so, the question of making the assessee liable for 50 per cent will not arise. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee has established that he is only a second seller of wheat products in question and as such, the tax liability will not arise on his sales. Accordingly, the assessment made under section 16 for all these years in question cannot be sustained and the common order of the Tribunal is set aside. The tax revisions are allowed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Petitions allowed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 267 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ctions given hereinbelow The petitioner may prefer appeals to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. If such appeals are preferred, we direct the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the same preferably within three months from the date of registration of the appeals. Having regard to the fact that the Tribunal has no power to stay the collection of the disputed tax for the relevant assessment years and keeping in view the facts and circumstances, we feel it just and proper to direct that the stay granted by this Court in W.P. M.P. Nos. 23596, 23597 and 23598 of 1988, will operate pending disposal of the appeals subject to the same conditions prescribed in the said W.P. M.Ps., i.e., keeping the bank guarantees alive, to the satisfaction of the respondents. It is open to either party to move this Court regarding the continuance or otherwise of the interim order in case the disposal of the appeals is delayed. Government Pleader s fee Rs. 200 in each. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 266 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... with effect from the dates of issuance of the said certificates. The petitioners are entitled to exemption from tax under the Incentive Schemes on the basis of the eligibility certificates with effect from the date of submission of the applications and the assessment orders passed by the assessing authority under section 7-B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and under section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act read with section 7-B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act in respect of the period subsequent to the date of submission of the applications for grant of the eligibility certificates and the demand notices issued by the assessing authorities for the recovery of the tax assessed under the assessment orders are quashed. Writ Petition No. 867 of 1989 (Mahesh Chand Goyal and another v. State of Rajasthan and others) is hereby dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs in all these writ petitions. Writ Petition No. 867 of 1989 dismissed and all other writ petitions allowed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 265 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ny event, the Revenue is not entitled to get the tax collected twice on the same goods while the goods are exigible to tax on a single point But we may make it clear that we are not basing our decision on this ground alone. We are satisfied that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the principles laid down by this Court and the Supreme Court, the turnover in question represents the unfructified sales and, therefore, the tax paid on those unfructified sales is liable to be returned, and the rejection on the ground that the claim was not made in time treating the same as sales returns , cannot be sustained. 18.. In the result, the appeal is allowed, and the order of the Board of Revenue is set aside. Consequently, the order of the assessing officer dated November 15, 1978 (after remand), is restored subject to factual mistakes if there are any, as pointed in paragraph 7 of the Board s Order. However, there will be no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 264 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 1989, by the Commercial Tax Officer, Suryaraopet, Vijayawada. Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion under article 226 of the Constitution and give a direction for the refund of the tax merely because at the time of payment of tax, no assessment order was passed or demand raised. Suffice it to give a direction that the concerned assessing authority, viz., the Commercial Tax Officer, Suryaraopet, Vijayawada, should finalise the assessment within three months from the date of receipt of the order, if not already finalised. The amount of Rs. 80,000 collected on September 6, 1989, and September 8, 1989, will be adjusted towards any tax or penalty that may be payable by the petitioner as a result of the assessment proceedings and the balance, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner. The writ petition is thus partly allowed as indicated above. There will be no order as to costs. Government Pleader s fee Rs. 250. Writ petition partly allowed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 263 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... other words, even before the learned Advocate was directed to take notice on 23rd October, 1989, the order had been passed. That has not been challenged. Therefore, on 2nd January, 1990, this Court directed that the petition must be suitably amended. The matter has come up for preliminary hearing with an application for amendment. That amendment may be deemed to have been permitted. Then the question remains whether the order under section 25A, is without jurisdiction or merely an order made under misapplication of law. Therefore, if it is a mistake in law as pointed out by the petitioner himself, then there is no want of jurisdiction and as such without recourse to the remedy provided under the Act this Court cannot be approached under article 226 of the Constitution. In that view of the matter, the petitioner s remedy lies only in approaching the appellate forums constituted for such reliefs. In that view of the matter, this petition is dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 262 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... only ground on which the deduction was disallowed by the authorities was, according to the learned counsel, that this type of cash discount could not be brought within the scope of section 2(h) of the Central Act. That reasoning of the authorities, according to the learned counsel, cannot be sustained in the light of the above observation of this Court. If the correspondence that exchanged between the parties regarding the quality of the yarn and consequential reduction in price are not questioned, then, the price payable by the customer will be only at the reduced rate. Therefore, even, on the definitions of section 2(h) and (j) of the Central Act, the disputed turnover is not liable to be included in the taxable turnover. 8.. For all these reasons, we hold that the disputed turnover is not includible in the taxable turnover of the assessee for the assessment year 1977-78 and the tax case is allowed accordingly. However, there will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1990 (4) TMI 261 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
SSI Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... It also follows from a reading of the Notification that even if specified goods falling under one of the Headings manufactured by the manufacturer exceeds Rs. 15 lakhs and the value of the first clearances of all other excisable specified goods not having exceeded Rs. 30 lakhs, the other goods would continue to enjoy the exemption till the aggregate ceiling of Rs. 30 lakhs exemption for first clearances is reached rdquo . The Tribunal in the decision also referred to a Trade Notice issued by the Coimbatore Collectorate dated 30-3-87 which said, inter alia, ldquo the language of the Notification cannot give rise to the presumption that wherein the case of any one product the limit set for that product is exceeded, the duty is payable on the other goods, where the limit has not yet been reached rdquo . We find that the ratio of the above decision is fully applicable to the facts of the present case and following the same, the appeal is allowed, and the impugned order set aside.
-
1990 (4) TMI 260 - DELHI HIGH COURT KARNATAKA
Court – Jurisdiction of, Meetings and proceedings - Annual General Meeting, Sections 171 to 186 to apply to meetings, Passing of resolution by
-
1990 (4) TMI 259 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Winding up – Commencement of, Overriding preferential payments, Avoidance of certain attachments, executions, etc.
-
1990 (4) TMI 246 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... further business. Mr. Soparkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the labourers (newly added party), submitted that the court may not admit these matters at this stage. Otherwise, the only sufferes would be the labourers. They would be deprived of their bread. He further submitted that the intention of the petitioners in insisting on admission of these matters is only to see that they get their money immediately out of priority. He further submitted that at present if the matters are admitted, the petitioners who are unsecured creditors are not likely to be benefited. In view of the law laid down by this court as well as the Supreme Court, it is abundantly clear that the petitioning creditors have no absolute right to insist on winding up of the company even if the company is unable to pay its debts. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice to give the company some time to come out of its momentary financial crisis. Hence, at present these matters are not admitted.
-
1990 (4) TMI 231 - SUPREME COURT
Whether, when the highest offer in response to an invitation is rejected, would not the public authority be required to provide reasons for such action ?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The submission of Mr. Dwivedi, therefore, commends itself to our acceptance, namely, that when highest offers of the type in question are rejected, reasons sufficient to indicate the stand of the appropriate authority should be made available and, ordinarily, the same should be communicated to the concerned parties unless there be any specific justification not to do so
-
1990 (4) TMI 230 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... then the court can reject the contention of the company holding that the dispute raised is only to create a defence to the winding-up application on flimsy grounds. In the instant case, the defence taken by the company does not appear to be flimsy. As discussed above, without showing a relationship between M/s. Rameshkumar Devkinandan and the petitioner-company, the company is not entitled to claim that the company owes a debt to the petitioner. Similarly, the claim for damages is also a debatable issue and authorisation of payment to Shri Kaushik is also disputed by the company. As such, I am of the opinion that these issues can best be decided only in a civil court. It is not a case where the debt owed by the company is unimpeachable and undisputable. The petition, therefore, deserves to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs in view of the fact that the notice given by the petitioner-company was not replied to in time by the opponent company.
-
1990 (4) TMI 229 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... an appropriate the sale proceeds of the said security subject to and without prejudice to the rights and claims of the workmen of the company in liquidation over the said sale proceeds (d)The grant of leave in this application to the applicant-bank will not be construed as grant of leave to the Pondicherry Industrial Promotion Development and Investment Corporation Limited (seventh defendant) which has not moved this court for leave to continue the suit in O.S. No. 427 of 1984 (e)The grant of leave on terms as above to the applicant-bank does not amount to grant of leave to the Pondicherry Industrial Promotion Development and Investment Corporation Limited (seventh defendant) to work out its rights, if any, as a purported secured creditor of the company in liquidation through a court of law (f)The applicant bank secured creditor can prove only for the deficiency of the balance amount representing the principal and interest calculated up to the date of the order of winding up.
-
1990 (4) TMI 228 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Oppression and Mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... the fifth respondent s group. I, accordingly, direct that respondents Nos. 2 to 4 shall exercise their first choice to purchase the shares of the petitioners, the fifth respondent and the other shareholders of the fifth respondent s group within two months from today at the face value of the shares. In case of default, the petitioners and the fifth respondent shall have the choice of purchasing the shares of the first respondent and his group of shareholders at the face value of the shares. If both the groups fail to exercise the above choice or commit default in payment, there is no other choice, but for the company to be wound up. It is open to any one of the shareholders to move the court for appropriate orders in the event of the above two options not being exercised by respondents Nos. 2 to 4 in the first instance and the fifth respondent and his group of shareholders in the second instance. With the above directions, the company petition is dismissed but without costs.
-
1990 (4) TMI 201 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... llowing clause. 4. As part of the consideration for the transfer, the transferee-company shall allot to the shareholders of the transferor-company (whose names stand in the register of members of the transferor-company as on the day on which this scheme is sanctioned) for every 1 (one) equity share of Rs. 100 (rupees one hundred only) each of the transferor-company, 4 (four) equity shares of Rs. 10 (rupees ten only) each of the transferee-company as fully paid-up, i.e, to say, the transferee-company shall allot for each of 25,000 (twenty-five thousand) equity shares of Rs. 100 (rupees one hundred only) each of the transferor-company, 1,00,000 (one lakh) equity shares of Rs. 10 (rupees ten only) each of the transferee-company as fully paid-up. Equity shares so allotted by the transferee-company will in all respects rank pari pasu with the existing equity shares of the transferee-company for dividends and voting rights . The aforesaid scheme shall take effect from April 1,1987.
-
1990 (4) TMI 200 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Applicability of Code of Civil Procedure ... ... ... ... ..... articularly the nature of the issues involved, I see no justification for the prayers made. This is more so in the light of the observations of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Needle Industries ( India) Ltd. v. Needle Industries Newey (India ) Holding Ltd. 1981 51 Comp. Cas. 743 , wherein it is emphasised that (page 786) It is generally unsatisfactory to record a finding involving grave consequences to a person on the basis of affidavits and documents without asking that person to submit himself to cross-examination. It is true that men may lie but documents will not and often, documents speak louder than words. But a total reliance on the written word, when probity and fairness of conduct are in issue, involves the risk that the person accused of wrongful conduct is denied an opportunity to controvert the inference said to arise from the documents . (emphasis added). Therefore, the prayers made in this application are declined with costs which I determine at Rs. 500.
-
1990 (4) TMI 199 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Stock exchange ... ... ... ... ..... tself is somewhat significant. In these circumstances, the denial of membership to the first petitioner is a valid exercise of a right which the governing board has of granting membership or not granting membership to a candidate. Rule 28 does not violate article 19. Under rule 28, all new members, whether they are nominated or not, have to be elected by ballot. Each candidate has to secure a majority of not less than 2/3rds of the votes cast. The first petitioner failed to secure even a simple majority. Only 2 votes were cast in her favour and 15 were against her. When the election is by ballot, there is no question of giving any reason for rejection. Looking to the circumstances of the present case, the rejection does not appear to be mala fide or based on grounds which are not germane to the objects of the stock exchange. In these circumstances, therefore, no intervention is called for under article 226 of the Constitution. The petition is, therefore, dismissed with costs.
-
1990 (4) TMI 179 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation for goods ... ... ... ... ..... ion from the factory gate to the site is to be excluded Bombay Tyres International, reported in 1983 (14) E.L.T. page 1896 . 3. As regards the laying and jointing of the pipes, testing and maintenance these are, in our view, post-manufacturing activities. The contract is a composite contract for manufacture and executing the work. The cost for executing the work is separable. Further the testing and maintenance of pipe is not an essential part of manufacturing activity. Secondly, the pipes laid at site through civil work and permanently attached to earth without which they cannot perform or work. Therefore, the expenses incurred towards the activity of laying and jointing pipes, maintenance of the pipes, testing of the pipe is not includible in the assessable value. 4. We accordingly set aside the order of the Collector and remand the same to the Asstt. Collector directing him to redetermine the assessable value in the light of the above. The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
-
1990 (4) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appellate Order ... ... ... ... ..... ppeal. 28. The office of the President, Cegat was vacant for nearly 2 years 6 months and, in the interregnum, a number of Special Bench cases involving difference of opinion have arisen. If all the cases like the present one are to be re-heard by the Tribunal, it would certainly cause undue hardship to the litigants from far-flung areas and would further delay the course of justice. Surely, Courts, and Tribunals, should strive to interpret law in such a way as to make it work smoothly. That is the law declared by Courts in several pronouncements. Having regard to the analysis of the legal position contained in the preceding paragraphs, I am of the opinion that the course suggested by the learned D.R. is neither legally required nor pragmatically justified. 29. In the light of the foregoing discussion, I reject the preliminary submission made by the learned Departmental Representative. The matter will now come up on 5-7-1990 at 10.30 A.M for hearing on the point of difference.
........
|
