|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 205 Records
-
1980 (7) TMI 237 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... that there had been a conversion and very different items of specific goods had come into existence in place of logs of wood. It, therefore, very appropriately found that the proviso had been rightly applied. In our view, on the facts, each of the cases has been rightly decided and there is no conflict as such. 9.. As we have already pointed out, it is difficult to lay down guideline in a straightjacket. Discretion must be left to the officers concerned to apply the proviso keeping acceptable principles in view and as long as the identity of the goods is maintained, the substitute rule is applicable and the common man is prepared to accept the goods in the two forms as substantially the same, the proviso should not be applied. We do not intend to interfere with the discre. tion of the officer because every situation cannot be covered by the guideline. There would be no order for costs in this reference. PANDA, J.-I agree. MOHANTI, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1980 (7) TMI 236 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ttedly, the quarries upon which the assessee was permitted to work belonged to the State Government and he was allowed to appropriate the chips and stones extracted by him on payment of royalty at the stipulated rate. 8.. The conditions in the contract make it clear that the assessee who was the owner of the goods sold the same for a price to the public works department and the sale price became exigible to tax. The view taken by the Additional Member that it amounted to a works contract was reached on a complete misconception of the legal position. Our answer to the two questions referred are (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the transaction is a sale exigible to tax and (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the contract in question was not a works contract. The assessee shall pay the costs of the revenue. Hearing fee is assessed at Rs. 250 (Two hundred and fifty). PANDA, J.-I agree. MOHANTI, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1980 (7) TMI 235 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ....in unwrought state, not or not completely manufactured, r. silk, as reeled from cocoons.......... The meaning indicates that any material or commodity in its natural or semi-manufactured state, which is capable of being used for manufacture of any other kind of finished products which could be prepared out of such material is a raw material. Silk in its raw or natural state is found only in the form of cocoons whether pierced or not. Therefore, there can be no doubt that pierced cocoon is raw silk (raw material) used for the manufacture of one variety of Here italicised. manufactured silk, that is, spun silk, and falls within entry 38-A of the Fifth Schedule to the Act. 8.. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal is correct and has to be accepted. Accordingly, we make the following order (i) These revision petitions are dismissed. (ii) The respondent is entitled to costs. Advocate s fee in one set Rs. 260. Petitions dismissed.
-
1980 (7) TMI 234 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... und for withholding the tax which was paid by the petitioner. No order of stay was obtained by the Commercial Tax Officer to that effect. The learned Government Pleader submits that it is not necessary to obtain stay orders. When orders of stay have not been obtained, it becomes necessary to consider the matter under section 33-C of the Act. As already observed, section 33-C contemplates several conditions to be fulfilled before withholding the refund. When an application is filed for refund, the conditions laid down in section 33-C have to be taken into consideration before withholding the refund. This Court cannot direct the respondent to issue orders to the Commercial Tax Officer to pass an order for refund of the tax. Therefore, it is directed that the petition filed by the petitioner will be considered irrespective of the fact that the tax revision cases are pending before this Court. The petitions are disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Ordered accordingly.
-
1980 (7) TMI 232 - SUPREME COURT
Whether section 8(2)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, is unconstitutional and void as violating article 301 of the Constitution?
Held that:- Allow these appeals, set aside the judgment of the Madras High Court and direct that the sales which form the subject-matter of dispute in these appeals are taxable at the rate of seven per cent under section 8(2)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 which does not offend articles 301 and 303(1) of the Constitution and is valid.
-
1980 (7) TMI 224 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the assessing authority has acted without power in including in its total turnover certain amounts recovered by the petitioner from its customers as tentative deposits on the sale of goods made to them?
Held that:- Writ petitions are allowed and the assessment orders are quashed in so far as they include the amounts recovered as "deposits" in the total turnover of the petitioner for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72.
-
1980 (7) TMI 215 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Directors - Power of, Amendment of provision relating to managing director, Managing director - Approval of Government for appointment
-
1980 (7) TMI 214 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Inter-corporate investment ... ... ... ... ..... s of the present case, I hold that the Central Govt. must be presumed to have been satisfied that the transferee-company does not attract the operation of the MRTP Act. This objection of the CLB also fails and is rejected. Before I conclude this judgment, I must say that I find it rather baffling to understand as to why the CLB should spend good taxpayer s money in opposing an application for the sanction of a scheme of amalgamation on mere frivolous grounds when both the equity and preference shareholders of the holding company have unanimously approved the scheme of amalgamation of a wholly owned subsidiary. In the result, this application succeeds and is allowed. There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition sanctioning the scheme with effect from the 1st April, 1979. There will be orders in terms of prayers (b), (c), (d ), (e), (f) and (g ) of the petition. There will be no order as to costs. The stay of operation of the order is prayed for and is refused.
-
1980 (7) TMI 213 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Powers of Court to rectify register of members, Power to prohibit contracts in certain cases ... ... ... ... ..... effective. Issue No. 6 is, therefore, answered in favour of the petitioner-company . The facts of the case before me are identical on this point with the facts of the above decision by R. Bhattacharya J. With respect I follow the above decision and I hold that the transaction in the present case is in clear contravention of section 13 of the Act, as admittedly, it was not transacted by a member of the stock exchange. I also hold that the transaction in question is in contravention of section 16 of the Act. It would, therefore, follow that the company was entirely within its rights in refusing to register the transfer on the ground that the transaction was illegal. Mr. Nag relied on certain authorities for the proposition that the company was under an obligation to register only legal and valid transfers. This proposition was not disputed by Mr. Gupta. This disposes of all the contentions raised by the parties. In the result, this application fails and is dismissed with costs.
-
1980 (7) TMI 212 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Winding up – Delivery of property to liquidator, Application of insolvency rules ... ... ... ... ..... midnight of 4/5th February, 1976, as the said sums were collected by the respondent-board as trustee or agent on behalf of the company in liquidation. Such payment to be made to the Joint Liquidators within a fortnight from date. The Joint Liquidators will keep the said amount in a separate account invested in a nationalised bank on a short-term deposit for a period not less than 181 days and keep the same renewed until further order of this court. The said respondent-Board will also pay the outstanding arrears of charges which are to be collected by them as trustee or agent from the consumers due up to the said date of taking over to the Joint Liquidators in terms of this order as and when realised and the Joint Liquidators will also keep the said amount in a separate account in a nationalised bank invested in the same manner as hereinbefore stated. No order as to costs. Stay of operation of the order asked for is refused. All parties to act on a signed copy of the minutes.
-
1980 (7) TMI 211 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Investigation of company’s affairs in other cases ... ... ... ... ..... point raised is that the company has been incurring loss year after year but no investigation could be ordered unless that result is linked with fraud, misfeasance, mismanagement, oppression and the like. The loss might be an ordinary business risk It may be noticed that the company s paid up capital and membership have risen by at least one hundred per cent between 1976 and 1978. The petitioners are only two out of 1,312 members. The company has also a case that the first petitioner is the wife of a dismissed employee and that the 2nd is annoyed by a notice demanding payment of some amounts due from him. It is unnecessary to go into this aspect because, even otherwise, the attempt of the petitioners has only been to show that something suspicious had taken place between 1971 and 1975. In, my view, therefore, no case for the issue of a direction under section 237(a)(ii ) is made out, and the petition has to fail. It is accordingly dismissed, but without any order as to costs.
-
1980 (7) TMI 184 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... riod covered by the notifications issued under section 3(2) of the Kerala Act. C.P. No. 15 of 1977 as well as Application No. 435 of 1978 filed therein and C.P. Nos. 16 to 18 of 1977 will accordingly go back to the learned company judge for being disposed of in accordance with law after the expiry of the period of stay. The parties will bear their respective costs. Immediately after the pronouncement of the judgment, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners orally prayed under article 134A of the Constitution for the grant of certificates under article 133(1) of the Constitution to enable the petitioners to carry the matter in appeal before the Supreme Court. We do not, however, consider these to be fit cases for the grant of such certificates, since, in our opinion, these cases do not involve any substantial question of law of general importance on which a pronouncement by the Supreme Court can be said to be necessary. The prayers is accordingly rejected.
-
1980 (7) TMI 183 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... time was the essence of contract. In the case on hand, as pointed out by me earlier in the course of this order, the respondent has admitted that time was not the essence of the contract and that is borne out by the conduct of the parties to Ex. P-1. The ruling of the Supreme Court has no application to the facts of this case. In the result, the application of the official liquidator is liable to succeed as prayed for with the following modifications. Interest at 18 per cent. per annum on Rs. 10,000 shall be calculated from the date of Ex. P-8 till date of application and at 6 per cent. per annum from the date of application till date of realisation as default on the part of the respondent must be reckoned from a date subsequent to Ex. P-8 and not before. If the respondent has paid any amount, the same shall be given as a deduction with corresponding counter interest. It is ordered accordingly and it is supplemental to the order made by Venkatachaliah J., on December 1, 1978.
-
1980 (7) TMI 169 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Subsidiary, Appointment of directors and proportion of those who are to retire by rotation, Inter-corporate investment, Oppression and mismanagement -Powers of Government to prevent
-
1980 (7) TMI 162 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Winding up – Power of court to assess damages against delinquent, directors, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... f their respective deceased parents. Even para. 33 (AIR 1973 SC) of Tendolkar s case 1973 43 Comp. Cas. 382, 397, 398 (SC) even if understood very liberally, it cannot be said that it is the final expression of the view of the Supreme Court. That is made amply clear by the Supreme Court itself. I am more persuaded by the approval of the Supreme Court of the construction put by the High Courts in India on the language of section 543 which renders proceedings against legal representatives not maintainable. In the result, the objections on behalf of respondents Nos. 10-A(i), (ii ), (iii) and (iv) and 10-B(i ), (ii), (iii) and (iv ) are sustained. The official liquidator cannot maintain proceedings either under section 542 or section 543 of the Act against the said respondents-legal representatives. Therefore, those respondents will be deleted and the proceedings against others who are not already deleted will continue. Respondents-legal representatives will bear their own costs.
-
1980 (7) TMI 152 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... ly the language in which the circular is couched, particular the reference in it to the lack of any provision in the Act indicating the procedure to be adopted in such an event and consequently its expression of anxiety to confer a bounty on the assessees by allowing a concession adopting a most beneficial view to the assessees, we think, it is a concession conferred on the assessees, notwithstanding the statute in its present form provided for a different eventually. We, therefore, think that the assessee is entitled to the concession that the State chose to give as a matter of policy. We are unable to see in the circular any imposition of fetters on the quasi judicial function of the WTO. Thus understood, we think, the AAC not only correctly interpreted the circular, but applied it also. On this aspect there has been no controversy before us either. The question of enhancement does not, therefore, arise. We, therefore, confirm the order of the AAC and dismiss these appeals.
-
1980 (7) TMI 150 - ITAT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... y be. In the case of M. Chennakrishnan vs. 3rd WTO in WTA Nos. 141 and 142/Mds/1976-77, dt. 21st May, 1977, the Madras Bench-A of the Tribunal held that where a firm purchases systematically yarn, employs weavers to convert them into cloth and sells cloth on its own, those activities would amount to manufacturing activity to which to provisions of s. 5(1) (xxxii). In this case we find reference to several other cases where identical view has been held under identical circumstances, though the raw material and end product are different. 8. On a consideration of the above, we hold the view that the firm, which buys raw material and gets it converted into finished product be it oil or gold ornaments by paying conversion charges, is an industrial undertaking and the value of the interest of the assessees in that firm is eligible for exemption under s. 5(1) (xxxii) of the WT Act, 1957. 9. In the result, the departmental appeals are dismissed and the assessee s appeals are allowed.
-
1980 (7) TMI 148 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... matters in dispute as ordinarily understood would not make it a settlement of the contract , in the sense in which the expression contract-settled is used in Expln. (2) to s. 24(1) of the Act . There is thus overwhelming authority for the proposition that payment of damages in the event of a breach of the contract does not fall under s. 43(5) of the IT Act, 1961, and such a transaction cannot be considered as speculative transaction. On the facts stated above, we hold that in the present case there was non-performance of the contract either because of closure of loading by the Railway Authorities or on account of non-availability of the wagons and, therefore, breach of the contracts took place for which the assessee had to pay damages. The assessee s claim for deduction as business loss should have been accepted. We direct accordingly. 16. Ground No. 6 relating to charging of interest under ss. 139 and 215 has not been pressed. 17. In the result the appeal succeeds partially.
-
1980 (7) TMI 147 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... e provision of s. 55A of the IT Act, 1961, r/w s. 23(3A) of the WT Act, 1957. We, therefore, agree with the Revenue that the CIT(A) was not right in rejecting the report of the Valuation Officer without giving any opportunity of being heard. For the reasons, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) to this extent and restore the case back to him with the limited direction that he will give an opportunity to the Valuation Officer of being heard before interfering with his valuation pertaining to the building. We already pointed out that the valuation of the land is not in dispute as the ITO s view which is based on the Valuation Officer s report, has been accepted by the CIT(A) as such. So, the CIT(A) will record a clear finding on the valuation of the building after giving due opportunity of being heard to the Valuation Officer. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is to be treated to be allowed only for statistical purposes.
-
1980 (7) TMI 146 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ed this stock for carrying on personal business. How the assessee carried on the personal business and earned income in asst. yr. 1975-76 and in asst. yr. 1976-77 was an entirely a different matter. According to the assessee the same was earned without the aid of the existing stock as no capital was required. It is not improbable that the assessee could have done so. In any case, as already stated, if the statement off the assessee was open to doubt, clarification could have been obtained from the assessee. In our view the material and evidence before the authorities below was not properly appreciated and revenue failed to made a proper case for the addition of Rs. 30,000. The ld. AAC also did not provide any justification for retaining the addition to the extent of Rs. 20,000. We hold that the addition of Rs. 30,000 was not justified at all. Hence we direct that the remaining addition of Rs. 20,000 be also deleted. 7. In the result ITA No. 447 succeeds and C.O. No. 37 fails.
........
|
