|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 267 Records
-
1986 (8) TMI 418 - SUPREME COURT
Whether a court while hearing writ petitions is under an obligation to pass a speaking order?
Held that:- The appeal is allowed and the judgment and order passed on 8th October, 1984 is hereby set aside. Every quasi-judicial order must be supported by reasons. This well-settled principle will undoubtedly apply to orders made by a court in disposing of writ applications. The court below is directed to dispose of the said writ petition in accordance with law after giving hearing to the parties and by passing a speaking order as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the records by the court below.
-
1986 (8) TMI 417 - SUPREME COURT
Whether appellants are governed by the definition of the word "dealer" in section 2(d) of the Punjab Act or by section 2(c) of the Haryana Act for assessment years 1964-65 to 1968-69?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. As in the definition of "business" the profit-motive had not been omitted, and therefore without anything more it could not be said that the person carrying on those transactions was a dealer. The court rested the burden on the revenue to show that the transactions carried on by the appellant were carried on with a profit-motive. In the end, inasmuch as the appeals before it were concerned with the years 1965-66 to 1967-68 having regard to the lapse of time the court, while allowing the appeals and quashing the assessments, did not think it fit to remand the cases for fresh assessment proceedings.
-
1986 (8) TMI 402 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Right to obtain copies and inspect trust deed, Winding up – Application for ... ... ... ... ..... iff, applies for continuance of the interim order for a period of one week from today. Originally pending the disposal of the motion, the first defendant company had by consent between the parties made a statement that they would not issue debentures till July 2, 1986, although the entire series had been subscribed to. For various reasons which need not be examined, as the motion was not likely to be disposed of by that date, on July 1, 1986, the statement was extended for the entire period during the pendency of the motion. I do not see any reason why any stay should be granted now preventing the first defendant company from issuing new debentures. The company has received monies as far as back as May, 1986, and it has not issued debentures so far entirely because of the statement made during the pendency of motion. In my view, it would, not be in the interest of the proposed debenture-holders to hold up the issue of proposed debentures. The application for stay is rejected.
-
1986 (8) TMI 393 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Restriction on acquisition, holding, etc., of immovable property in India, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... prevent the breach of an obligation existing in fav6ur of the plaintiff, whether expressly only implication and also when the defendant invades or threatens to invade the plantifi s right to a property or to the enjoyment thereof, but such kind of relief can be granted obviously, when the plaintiff himself is in possession of the property or when, having been deprived of his possession, the plaintiff seeks, as one of the reliefs, the restoration of the said property. In the present case, no prayer for restoration of possession was made and, therefore, the courts below rightly held that, on that ground also, the petitioner was not entitled to any injunction. Be that as it may, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in all fairness, conceded that the construction in question is already completed and as such, it is obvious that, in any event, this revision application has become infructuous. The result is, therefore, that this revision application is dismissed with costs.
-
1986 (8) TMI 384 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Associations and partnerships exceeding certain numbers - Prohibition of, Winding-up of unregistered companies
-
1986 (8) TMI 383 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Winding up - Power of court to assess damages against delinquent directors, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... am of the view that it will not be just, fair or equitable to allow continuation of the proceedings against the legal representatives. The mandate of the section is to examine into the conduct of the delinquent director. In such circumstances to allow the continuation of the proceedings against the legal representatives would cause great prejudice to the legal representatives inasmuch as the legal representatives may be wholly and roundly nescient of the particulars of the transactions the deceased director had with the company or the disputed dealings which resulted in the alleged loss to the company. In such circumstances, I feel that this court should exercise its power of discretion to disallow the applications of the liquidator to implead the legal representatives, and that will be a proper and judicial exercise of discretionary power under sections 542 and 543 of the Act. The circumstances and facts I have stated tell me that I should dismiss the applications. I do so.
-
1986 (8) TMI 367 - HIGH COURT OF KERLA
... ...
... ... ..... application. It has been stated in Halsbury s Laws oj England, fourth edition, volume 39, pages 426 and 427 A strong case must be made out to dispossess a party who is interested and who has the legal title. As against a prior legal mortgagee in possession, for instance, a receiver will not be appointed unless the mortgagee s debt has been wholly satisfied . Generally, the court does not appoint a receiver if the appointment may involve grave risk of injury to the interests of other persons interested. The court will be reluctant to risk damage to the reputation of a professional partnership by appointing a receiver, particularly where the integrity of the partners is not in question . Since the impugned order does not give the reasons for the appointment of the receiver, we set aside the same and remand the matter to the judge dealing with company matters to be considered afresh as to whether the appointment of a receiver would be necessary in the circumstances of the case.
-
1986 (8) TMI 366 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Loans to directors, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... general scheme of advances given by the company to other employees, whether the amount given is disproportionate to the salary of the employee, whether the conditions of repayment or the other conditions of the loan like the rate of interest are exorbitant, whether there was laxity in the recovery of the advance, etc. It is in taking into consideration all the circumstances surrounding the operation that the court can reach the correct conclusion. In this case, the prosecution has been put on notice that accused No. 5, who is the wife of the director, is also an employee and that she was given the amount as salary advance. In order to establish that the amount given as salary advance is a disguised loan, no evidence whatsoever is available on any aspect disclosing that there has been a circumvention of law. In the absence of any such evidence, the case of the prosecution cannot be accepted. Hence, the revision petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence are set aside.
-
1986 (8) TMI 365 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding up - Statement of affairs to be made to official liquidator ... ... ... ... ..... A reading of the provisions of section 454 of the Act would make it abundantly clear that non-filing of the statement of affairs in time is a continuing offence and it terminates only on the filing of the statement of affairs. That is why under sub-section (5) of section 454, the punishment of fine could extend to one hundred rupees for every day during which the default continued. Mr. Malhotra is right when he says that in the present case, section 472 of the Code would be applicable. I will also note that in his application (Crl. M. (Co.) No. 7 of 1984), accused, B.K. Bedi, also stated that since he had resigned more than one year before the winding-up order, he could not be called upon to submit the statement of affairs and as such he was not liable under that section. Nothing, however, was said on this aspect. In any case, the accused would be entitled to take up this point after the cross-examination of the complainant. Accordingly, all these applications are dismissed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 346 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Import - Countervailing duty ... ... ... ... ..... h he was also a party and, as already observed, one of which had even been written by him. We, therefore, find, with all respects to the learned Member, the majority view in the last judgment of the Tribunal to be fully answering all the contentions raised on behalf of the respondent. We have also gone into all these arguments, and the additional arguments as addressed before us, and find no ground made out to take a different view, particularly when we find that none of the judgments of the Tribunal has been taken in appeal as no such statement was made before us on behalf of the respondent. 11. emsp For all the foregoing reasons, we set aside the assessed levy of countervailing duty on the imported goods, which are the subject-matter of these appeals before us, as a classification under TI 34-A of the CET cannot be upheld, there being no countervailing duty at the relevant time for goods falling under TI 68. We, therefore, allow all these appeals, with consequential relief.
-
1986 (8) TMI 345 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Import - Countervailing duty ... ... ... ... ..... h he was also a party and, as already observed, one of which had even been written by him. We, therefore, find, with all respects to the learned Member, the majority view in the last judgment of the Tribunal to be fully answering all the contentions raised on behalf of the respondent. We have also gone into all these arguments, and the additional arguments as addressed before us, and find no ground made out to take a different view, particularly when we find that none of the judgments of the Tribunal has been taken in appeal as no such statement was made before us on behalf of the respondent. 11. emsp For all the foregoing reasons, we set aside the assessed levy of countervailing duty on the imported goods, which are the subject-matter of these appeals before us, as a classification under TI 34-A of the CET cannot be upheld, there being no countervailing duty at the relevant time for goods falling under TI 68. We, therefore, allow all these appeals, with consequential relief.
-
1986 (8) TMI 332 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Import and Export ... ... ... ... ..... refusal to grant Export House Certificate to the petitioner made it impossible to the petitioner to avail of all the facilities to which it was entitled under the Import Policy of 1981-82. It is, therefore, necessary to direct that the REP licences which would be endorsed pursuant to the following order will be revalidated for a period of six months from the date of the endorsement. 13. The petition is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (b)(i), (b)(ii) and (b)(iii) of the petition. It is further directed that the REP licences which are endorsed pursuant to this order shall be revalidated for a period of six months from the date of the endorsement. 14. The endorsement and the revalidation of the REP licences shall be done within 60 days from the date on which the application is re-submitted by the petitioner. The additional licence, however, shall be issued on or before 15th September 1986. There will be no order as to costs in this petition.
-
1986 (8) TMI 331 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... erial in dispute was an aritcle which the Department wanted to classify as steel plate. But the importers call them as ldquo mould rdquo . After considering the several aspects, the Tribunal has observed that the press plates perform the function of moulding. The process of manufacture unmistakably indicated that the products which emerge as plastic laminates, came into being only as a result of the constituent material being put under pressure in the hydraulic-press, sandwitched on interleaved between these press-plates, placed on the top and the bottom. The Tribunal has emphasised on the functional aspect of the impugned goods before arriving at a conclusion. On the same basis and in view of the several aspects placed before us, we are justified in coming to the conclusion that the impugned goods are only parts and not accessories. The classification of the goods under Tariff heading 84.59(1) is justified. The review show cause notice is dropped and the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 327 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Sodium borohydride ... ... ... ... ..... of the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal. 3. emsp We have heard Shri Rajan, JDR for the respondent. Shri Rajan agrees that the precedent (supra) on which the appellants place reliance covers the issue involved in the present appeal and the goods involved in that order i.e. Sodium Borohydride is the same goods involved in the present appeal. 4. emsp We observe that the decision supra was based upon its own facts and we would have liked to go into some more facts to appreciate the issue involved in the present appeal. Considering, however, that the J.D.R. agrees that the decision covers the issue involved in the present appeal as also the petty amount of claim, we are not inclined to do this ourselves in the present case and should it be necessary, this could be done in some other matter at a later date. 5. emsp Following the decision supra, we accept the appellant rsquo s claim and set aside the impugned order, and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1986 (8) TMI 326 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... orate General of Technical Development of Govt. of India and submitted that the goods would merit classification as claimed as component parts of air-conditioning and refrigeration machinery. 3. ensp After examining the technical data produced with reference to the imported material it appears tous that heading 84.18(1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which is in the following words - ldquo Centrifuges filtering and purifying machinery and apparatus (other than filter fuels, milk strainers and the like), for liquids or gases (1) Not elsewhere specified (2) Air filters oil or fuel filters for internal combustion piston engines. is more specific for the goods in question. 4. ensp We therefore set aside the classification done under Chapter 38 and order substitution of the aforesaid heading for the purpose of basic customs duty. Classification under Item 68 of Central Excise Tariff having not been disputed is not disturbed. 5. ensp The appeal is thus allowed in the foregoing terms.
-
1986 (8) TMI 325 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... e order of the Asst. Collr. for classification under T.I. 22 F(4) CET was properly set aside by the Appellate Tribunal. 4. ensp In any event we further hold that as far as that part of the order which dealt with the quantified duty demand the review show cause notice dated 3-5-1982 was barred by time since the proposal thereunder was to set aside the order in appeal dated 11-5-1981 and hence the notice was beyond the period of 6 months mentioned in Section 11-A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, which would be the period available for issue of the review notice in terms of the third proviso to Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act. Therefore even without reference to discussions on the question of classification, the review show cause notice will, in any event, have to be discharged at least with reference to this portion on the basis of limitation. 5. ensp In view of the above discussions we dismiss the appeal and discharge the show cause notice dated 3-5-1982.
-
1986 (8) TMI 324 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... , has written that same position will apply to the present appeal also and that the matter may be decided on the same footing and, for that reason, the appellants were not putting in personal appearance to-day. We have, therefore, taken up the appeal in the absence of the appellants. 3. ensp For the respondent, Shri J. Gopinath, SDR, is present. He has conceded that the goods in question are the same as in the appellants rsquo earlier aforesaid two appeals but has emphasised that he reiterates the arguments advanced by the Departmental Representative in the case of M/s. K. Mohan and Co. 4. ensp We have given our careful thought to the matter and we find that, since in spite of said arguments, three appeals by two different orders have been allowed in respect to identical, or similar, goods, we see no reason to take a different view in the present case. We, therefore, allow the appeal for re-classification of the goods under T.I. 84.40(1) of the CTA, with consequential relief.
-
1986 (8) TMI 315 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y Board refused to examine the witnesses of the detenu as it felt that no useful purpose would be served in examining them even though those witnesses were sought to be produced by the detenu for proving that the recovered and seized amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- was his lawful earning which could be accounted for and had nothing to do with the foreign exchange. It was held that by declining to examine the witnesses of the petitioner, which were present, the petitioner had been deprived of his valuable right of effectively representing his case before the appropriate Government and the continued detention which thereby stood vitiated was quashed. 8. So, in view of the above discussion, the detenu was deprived of his valuable right of effectively representing his case before the appropriate Government and this factor vitiates the continued detention of the detenu and so accepting this writ petition the detention of the detenu hereafter is quashed and he shall be released forthwith.
-
1986 (8) TMI 312 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Clubbing of value of clearances of separate firms unjustified ... ... ... ... ..... ompany v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-11 - 1985 (19) E.L.T. 441 (Tribunal), wherein the Tribunal has held that if it be found that the three firms (in that case) were distinct and separate, their clearances should not clubbed together for exemption purposes. 20. The various circumstances which have been held against the appellants by the lower authorities have been plausibly explained by the appellants. To establish the case against the appellants for fastening duty liability on them, something more would be required, for example, the existence of a person or a body of persons who, in reality, owned, directed and controlled the production in the four separate units which would show that the 4 units were only a facade to avail of the exemption. The circumstances brought on record do not point anything conclusively in this direction. In the circumstances, and on the facts of this case, I agree with Shri Raghavachari rsquo s conclusion that the appeals should be allowed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 311 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Imposition of penalty and appropriation of security deposit towards fine in lieu of confiscation of goods quashable
........
|
