|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 316 Records
-
1991 (7) TMI 349 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... one can get relief under the aforesaid circular in respect of transaction in question. Thus, it is not possible to accept the interpretation given by the respondent to the said circular. We are clearly of the opinion that the said circular will also include the exemption to dealer on such transaction on which purchase tax is leviable under section 3-D. However, the petitioners have already paid the purchase tax and has only challenged the assessment order passed under section 8(1) imposing interest and recovery proceeding for the imposition of interest on the aforesaid purchase tax under section 8(8). In the light of observations made by us above, we, on the facts of this case, quash the assessment order for imposition of interest under section 8(1) and recovery proceeding under section 8(8), annexures 1 and 7 respectively. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. However, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 348 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sing authority accordingly held that the transport charges will form part of the purchase price. This finding was specifically under challenge before the appellate authorities. The appellate authorities, after considering the various aspects of the issue and taking into account the materials made available by the parties, have concurrently found that the transporting charges represent amounts paid by the appellant-society to the lorry owners directly and therefore the said charges need not be included in the turnover. This concurrent finding concludes the issue. Nonetheless, it has not specifically been challenged by the Revenue which has filed these revision petitions. We, therefore, are not inclined to entertain the question which may convey some sense only if the above finding is specifically challenged. 5.. Under the circumstances, we answer the question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The T.R.Cs fail. Accordingly they are dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 347 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... articularly the proviso thereof, the assessee was entitled to pass on the burden of the tax, already suffered, to the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation. The submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) that since in the bill the sales tax was not separately shown this burden could not be passed on to the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, does not appeal to us as there is no requirement in the proviso that the amount of tax already suffered was required to be shown separately. Since on facts it is not disputed that the sales tax which has been included in the price by the assessee had actually been paid by the assessee to the other dealer from whom the oil was purchased to meet his obligations under the said G.O., the Tribunal did substantial justice by deleting the penalty under section 22(2) of the Act. The order of the Tribunal does not suffer from any error. The tax revision case, therefore, fails and is dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 346 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sought adjournment. The dealer was again called on November 14, 1983 and on November 15, 1983. On these two dates consignment transactions were verified and the case was adjourned. Thereafter it appears that the petitioner approached this Court on December 16, 1983 and moved the court on December 19, 1983. This Court initially issued notice and on January 17, 1984, admitted the matter and passed interim order to the effect that final order of assessment be not passed. Thus the assessment proceedings could not be completed. The aforesaid resume of facts do not require any comments. The facts speak for themselves. It is difficult to lay blame at the door of the department and say that the department was responsible for delay or that the department has acted unreasonably in extending the period of assessment. 16.. No other contention is raised. 17.. There is no substance in the petition. Hence rejected. Rule discharged. Interim relief granted stands vacated. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 345 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Only in such a situation the exercise of revisional power amounts to trenching upon the powers of appellate authority and/or the authority exercising the powers of rectification. Where no such proceedings are pending before the appellate authority or before the authority exercising powers of rectification, the exercise of powers by the revisional authority would not amount to trenching upon the powers of appellate authority or that of rectification authority. If such limitation-constraints are to be read on the powers of the revisional authority as contended by the learned counsel for the assessee then the power of the revisional authority would be illusory. No such limitation as is sought to be canvassed by the learned counsel for the assessee can be read on this power. 21.. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the reference is answered as indicated in para 4 of the judgment. Reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1991 (7) TMI 344 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... oduct, therefore, must be classified only as a chemical . The commodity is considered by the trade in common trade parlance also as falling within the description of chemical . The observations of the assessing authority and the Tribunal, based on the literature on the subject, to the effect that the heat treatment salt is only an intermediary produce which is used for carburising the finished metal articles also go to establish that the salt would only qualify as a chemical. 5.. Thus considered we hold that the heat treatment salt is a chemical and would fall under entry 138 of Schedule I to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, exigible to tax at 8 per cent. The Tribunal, therefore, committed no error in holding that the salt in question falls under entry 138 of Schedule I and is liable to tax at 8 per cent. The order of the Tribunal does not call for any interference. The revisions consequently fail and are dismissed. But we make no order as to costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 343 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 9.. In Chunni Lal Parshadi Lal v. Commissioner of Sales Tax 1986 62 STC 112 (SC) it is observed as follows The genuineness of the certificate and declaration in form III-A may be examined by the taxing authorities but not the correctness or the truthfulness of the statements made therein. The taxing authorities may examine whether the certificate was issued in collusion or was forged or fabricated, but not enquire whether the purchasing dealer had subsequently sold the goods or consumed them. 10.. We do not think that it is necessary to multiply the decisions on this subject. Suffice it to say that having regard to the subsequent legislative enactments referred to earlier, we are in respectful agreement with the views expressed in Premier Electro-Mechanical Fabricators v. State of Madras 1968 22 STC 269 and the order of the Tribunal does not require any reconsideration. Consequently, the revision fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 342 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 324. Though there was no order passed by the licensing authority reducing the seating capacity as required under the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955, the department took it for granted as if the seating capacity had been reduced from 382 to 324 and has collected the tax only on that basis. In these circumstances we do not see any justification on the part of the department in making demand after a lapse of more than six years on the technical plea that there was no order passed by the licensing authority reducing the seating capacity from 382 to 324. 5.. As we have already mentioned, as a matter of fact the petitioner reduced the seating capacity pursuant to the directions issued by the Executive Engineer and the department also had accepted the same as is evident from their conduct over the period. In these circumstances the impugned demand notice is quashed and the writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. Writ petition allowed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 341 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... IR 1988 SC 567 as governing the fact situation. 9.. The fact situation in the said decision was entirely different. The impugned notification involved therein specifically chose one trader for a beneficial treatment and therefore the contention of other traders attacking the said notification as discriminatory was upheld. The discrimination was patent in the said case. Nowhere the Bench of this Court observed that Indian Cement s case 1988 69 STC 305 (SC) AIR 1988 SC 567 has to be preferred to Video Electronics Pvt. Ltd. s case 1990 77 STC 82 (SC) AIR 1990 SC 820. Even otherwise it should be noted that the decision in Video Electronics case 1990 77 STC 82 (SC) AIR 1990 SC 820 is by a larger Bench of the three Judges while the decision in Indian Cement s case 1988 69 STC 305 (SC) AIR 1988 SC 567 was by a Bench of two Judges. 10.. In view of the above conclusion of ours nothing survives for further consideration. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... assed requiring the petitioner to furnish additional security then, possibly, subject to the rights of the petitioner the respondents may have been on firm ground in asking increase of security to be furnished before the issuance of the forms. In the present case no order having been passed the respondents cannot insist on the petitioner furnishing higher security merely on the basis of the show cause notice, to which a reply has already been filed, but no decision taken. We, therefore, allow this writ petition and direct the respondents to supply to the petitioner the forms asked for by him on the basis of the list furnished by him. These forms should be furnished within one month from today. The assessee will fill up the forms in front of the assessing officer. This is without prejudice to the rival contentions of the parties if and when final order is passed on the show cause notice which has been issued. Petition disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Writ petition allowed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 339 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y all the statutory authorities, and in our opinion, rightly that the transactions were not stock transferred to the branches, but inter-State sales. Secondly, there is nothing on the record to show that the same goods had been subjected to Central sales tax at the hands of the assessee. The affidavit besides being vague and not supported by any assessment order cannot advance the case of the assessee, because in the affidavit also what is averred to is that the transactions represent inter-branch transfers , which, as already found, is not the correct position in fact or law. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore fails. In view of the aforesaid discussion and keeping in view the law laid down in English Electric Company of India Ltd. v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer 1976 38 STC 475 (SC), we find no cause to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The revision therefore fails and is dismissed, but with no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 338 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... in those cases. But here, it is a statutory provision emanating from section 13, namely, rule 67A framed under that section. Therefore, the question of any option on the part of the dealers does not arise in the cases before us and the aforesaid decisions do not apply. 15.. In the result, we hold that item 2 in Schedule IV to the 1941 Act, inserted by the West Bengal Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988 and section 13 of the 1941 Act, read with rule 67A of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941, in so far as it relates to the requirements of certain dealers to record names and addresses of purchasers in bills or cash memos are valid and constitutional and do not infringe articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. All the 14 applications in RN-267 to 277 and RN-310, 311 and 384 of 1990 are accordingly dismissed. Interim orders, if any, are vacated. No order is made for costs. S.P. DAS GHOSH (Chairman).-I agree. P.C. BANERJI (Technical Member).-I agree. Applications dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 337 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... his indicates that it was intended to bring within it both pure silk yarn as well as artificial silk yarn. Even applying the common parlance test or the test as to how the goods are known in the industry, we are also of the opinion that the expression silk yarn would include within itself both pure silk yarn as well as artificial silk yarn. In the premises, as aforesaid, we are of the considered opinion that the expression silk yarn has been used in a generic sense and both the artificial silk yarn as well as the pure silk yarn would be covered by the said expression. We would accordingly answer the question posed to the effect that during the assessment year 1980-81, artificial silk yarn was exempted from levy of tax as per item 7 of the list of goods exempted from tax as well as it comes within the exclusive part under item 100 of the list of goods subject to levy of sales tax. The reference is answered accordingly. S.K. MOHANTY, J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1991 (7) TMI 336 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... kraborty lightly, no inference about the service of notice in form VII on the applicant in respect of the three assessments in question can be drawn. Mr. Chakraborty, the learned advocate for the applicant, states that after filing of the present application the applicant has been served with notices in form VII and also orders of assessment in respect of the aforesaid three assessments. In the circumstances, no order is called for, for directing the respondent No. 1 to serve notice in form VII afresh on the applicant relating to these three assessments. In the result, the application succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The certificate proceedings bearing Nos. 37 CT/87-88, 40 CT/87-88 and 41 CT/87-88, are quashed. The notices dated January 16, 1991 and February 7, 1991, sent by the respondent No. 2 to the applicant (annexures A and B of the main application) are also quashed. The main application is accordingly disposed of. No order is made as to costs. Application allowed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 335 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... appropriate orders on the applications filed under section 54 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. Since that was not done, the case of the assessees has been prejudiced because there is no denial of the fact that the account books, etc., had been seized as early as in 1978, by the income-tax authorities. In our opinion, therefore, without going into any other aspect of the case, these revisions deserve to be accepted and the cases are remanded to the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench), Madras, for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders on the applications filed under section 54 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act by the assessees and after examining the records and verifying the same, make fresh orders, after hearing the parties and granting them an opportunity to establish their respective pleas. The revisions therefore, partly succeed and are allowed but without any order as to costs. Petitions allowed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 334 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ssessee. The first condition envisaged by the apex Court is that for claiming the transaction as an independent transaction, the packing materials should have been separately classified in the Schedule (underlining by us). What Mr. Inbarajan, contends i. that the packing materials are taxable as multi-point goods under section 3(1) of the Act and, therefore, it must be deemed separately classified. Certainly this argument cannot be accepted because the apex Court points out that the packing materials should have been separately classified in the Schedule. The dictum of the apex Court cannot apply to the facts of this case. Further it is seen from the invoices that the description of the goods, is always in terms of the number of cases, that is in the form of crates. Therefore, the contention that the sale of packing materials forms part of an independent commodity cannot be accepted. Tax revision. cases therefore, fail and they are accordingly dismissed. Petitions dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 333 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... uthority himself had realised the mistake in accepting the return of the assessee and, therefore, there is no question of any mutual mistake. Section 22(2) of the Act leaves no option to the assessing authority once he comes to the conclusion that the dealer had collected any amount by way of tax or purported to be by way of tax in contravention of sub-section (1), but to impose a penalty not exceeding 1 frac12 times the amount collected. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Joint Commissioner on this aspect of the case. 8.. The last contention that penalty cannot be levied for the collection of surcharge has been negatived by this Court in T.C. No. 156 of 1980, dated February 6, 1980 (S. Rajaraman v. State of Tamil Nadu). Therefore that contention does not survive any longer. 9.. We find that all the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant fails and the tax case (appeal) consequently is dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 332 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... speaks of the eventuality which arise in case of a transfer of a business in whole or in part. When such a question arises the provisions contained under section 26(4) of the Act of 1969 would have precedence over the general provisions contained under section 31 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. In view of this position the abovesaid contention raised by Mr. Pathak also cannot be accepted. The conclusion therefore is that by the series of transactions there is a transfer of the business which was being run in the name of M/s. Energy Electrical Corporation to the present petitioner within the meaning of section 26(4) and, therefore, the petitioner would not be in a position to successfully challenge the notice of recovery or demand which is at annexure A. The petition therefore fails and requires to be dismissed. The petition is, therefore, accordingly dismissed. The ad interim relief, if any, operative up to date shall stand vacated. Rule discharged. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 331 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ng regard to the fact that no order was made by the assessing authority levying penalty nor even a proposal to invoke the power under section 12(3) of the Act relating to penalty had been made, the Deputy Commissioner could not, independently, in exercise of the suo motu power, invoke section 12(3) of the Act and levy penalty. The Deputy Commissioner, appellate authority, therefore, exceeded his jurisdiction while suo motu revising the order under section 12(2) of the Act to levy penalty under section 12(3) of the Act. The answer to the question posed in the earlier part of the judgment, therefore, is in the negative. 4.. In the view that we have taken, we do not find any cause to interfere with the order of the Tribunal particularly when we find that the view taken by the Tribunal is also in accord with the law laid down in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. K.M. Thomas and Co. 1973 31 STC 529 (Mad.). The tax revision case fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (7) TMI 330 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... as Compilation of Notifications under section 49 of Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (Act No. 1 of 1970), Volume I, by Mr. M.C. Padia. It therefore becomes clear that a special treatment was given to the commodity in question, namely water for injection as entry 83 in the abovesaid Notification with effect from April 1, 1976. It appears that the Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the Deputy Commissioner was right in not giving the prospective effect to his orders. It is clear that at any rate the changed effect ought to have been given to the commodity from the date of notification that is from April 1, 1976. This question therefore also requires to be replied and answered in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. We therefore hereby accordingly answer and reply all the abovesaid three questions in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue, with no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.
........
|
