|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 284 Records
-
1991 (8) TMI 308 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f such goods at the specified stages or otherwise than with reference to the turnover of the goods. In the instant case, it is not the case of the Revenue that the sale of the goods which was exempt by the notification referred to supra, was only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions, and not generally. That being the position, the explanation to section 8(2A) would not be attracted, and in view of the notification which rendered the sale exempt under the State Act, tax on the transaction in the course of inter-State sale would be nil. The view of the Tribunal, therefore, does not require any interference. In the view that we take we are fortified by the decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Hindustan Safety Glass Works (P.) Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1974 34 STC 209 and Central Food Storage v. Commissioner of Sales Tax 1977 40 STC 529. The tax revision case, therefore, fails and it is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 200. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 307 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rrect position in law. 17.. The petitioners have come to this Court against the proposition notices. To what extent the proceedings should be continued is a matter for the respondents to consider in the light of the declaration of the law made in this judgment. We allow these writ petitions by declaring the law as stated above and further permit the petitioners to file objections to the proposition notices in case the respondents persist in proceeding with the earlier notices and the petitioners are granted six weeks time from today to file the necessary objections to the notices received by them. If for any reason orders have been finalised already in any of the cases and assessment orders have been made contrary to the law declared above and such an order is under challenge in any one of the writ petitions herein, the same shall stand quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh according to law. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 306 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nnot be said that the turmeric so purchased by the assessee had been consumed in the manufacture of other goods for sale. Powdered turmeric is only a changed form of the turmeric purchased by the assessee. In our opinion, the provisions of section 7-A of the Act would not be attracted. The Tribunal clearly fell in error in holding otherwise. The revision petition, therefore, succeeds, and the orders of the authorities relating to the assessment of purchase tax under section 7-A would stand quashed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 305 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... in the Schedule. Ammonium nitrate by its very composition is only a chemical. It is also not specifically mentioned in the Schedule since it was expressly deleted from entry 21 by the amendment made in 1970. Ammonium nitrate would, therefore, be covered by entry 138 of the First Schedule and would be liable to tax at 8 per cent. The assessing authority as well as the appellate authority was thus justified in holding that ammonium nitrate was taxable at 8 per cent under entry 138 of the First Schedule to the Act. 5.. In view of the above discussion, our answer to the question is that ammonium nitrate fell under entry 138 of the First Schedule at the relevant time and it did not fall under entry 21 of the First Schedule. 6.. The order of the Tribunal is consequently set aside and that of the assessing authority and the appellate authority in that behalf, is restored. 7.. Since, there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent, we make no order as to costs. Petition allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 304 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... iety. But, whether the Legislature intended them not to be burdened with the tax, has to be clearly brought out from the legislative provisions at least there should be a clear manifestation of such an intention by necessary implication. We cannot assume that these low priced pens would be subjected to a series of sales before reaching the ultimate consumer. So far, the rate of tax prescribed under section 5(1) has been always lower than the rate of tax prescribed under the Second Schedule in respect of most of the goods. If actually, real hardship results from the levy of tax, it is for the Legislature or the State Government to consider the same. Function of the court is to interpret the law a meaning which cannot reasonably be attributed be given to the language employed by the Legislature. In these circumstances, it is not possible to accept the petitioner s contention. 14.. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 303 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t of discrepancy, the provisions in the State Act will have to be read down as having pro tanto stood modified , and if this is not done at the stage of assessment of the tax liability of the dealer i.e., the works contractor, the order may be set aright by the appropriate authority. In such cases, individual actions may be bad but that is no ground for holding that the provision of section 25A is in conflict with those of section 15 of the Central Act. Having reached this conclusion, and being in respectful agreement with the conclusions arrived at by brother S. Roy, J., on all other questions, what automatically follows is that, according to me, section 25A of the State Act does not suffer from any vice of illegality as alleged by the petitioners. I, accordingly, uphold the provisions as contained in section 25A of the State Act. 192.. I would, accordingly, dismiss these writ petitions as being devoid of any merit, but without any order as to costs. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 302 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... x Act which provides for taxation of goods in respect of which single point tax is leviable and come to the conclusion that the said products, viz., maida, ravva, atta, sujji and bran cannot be included in the category of wheat and therefore can be subjected to tax as provided under entry No. 60 of Schedule I to section 5 of the State Act. For the above reasons, it is held that the levy of sales tax under section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, on maida, ravva, atta, sujji and bran is perfectly legal. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed, but, in the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 250. After the judgment is pronounced an oral request is made for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under article 133 of the Constitution of India. We do not see any substantial question of law of general importance is involved in the matter which requires consideration by the Supreme Court. Leave refused. Writ petition dismissed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 301 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rest and comfort for human body having regard to the another sub-entry (iv), viz., mattresses. Therefore, we are of the view that the sub-entries do not form one category. It is not disputed before us that if the principle of ejusdem generis is not applied to entry 40, then the Thermofoam under consideration will fall under sub-entry (v), viz., other articles having regard to the literature issued by the assessee while introducing the goods in the market. Even otherwise, we feel that the product in question will fall under the residuary clause, viz., or other synthetic foam . On that view, we hold that the rule of ejusdem generis will not apply to entry 40 and consequently the later view taken by the Tribunal in the order challenged in T.C. No. 4 of 1987 is not sustainable. Accordingly, we set aside the order in Tribunal Appeal No. 693 of 1984 and allow T.C. No. 4 of 1987. Consequently, we dismiss T.C. No. 9 of 1986. There will be no order as to costs in both the tax cases.
-
1991 (8) TMI 300 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s goods by accountants will not carry the matter any further. What is stated above is the legal incident of such a right. At any rate, it is clear that the right to import goods granted under the import licence is not as ephemeral a right as to participate in a lottery and definitely is of a greater value in the commercial market. Therefore, I have no hesitation in holding that the contentions advanced on behalf of the petitioners have no substance. 8.. The question whether it should be subjected to levy of tax at multipoint or single point is a matter of legislative policy and even if it is not classified to be goods falling under any of the Schedules to the Act, section 5(1) of the Act is obviously attracted. In the circumstances, I find the challenge to the circular impugned herein is not well-founded. The petitions shall stand dismissed. Rule discharged. And in respect of those cases where rule has not been issued, the same shall stand rejected. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 299 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... lso the order dated 27th August, 1980 passed under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 1976-77 (annexure 2 to the writ petition) so far as they relate to the tax at the rate of 12 per cent on station wagon and remand this case to the authority concerned with a direction to decide afresh the same after giving opportunity to the parties and permitting them to lead the evidence as to whether the station wagons could be treated to be motor buses including their chassis and motor bodies built thereon under entry 62(b) of the aforesaid notification of 1976. This finding will be recorded by the assessing authority without any prejudice of the decision given in the case of Gopal Enterprises 1979 UPTC 1129 so far it affects the petitioner in view of what we have said above. With the aforesaid observations the present writ petition is allowed and the case is remanded to the authority concerned to decide the same afresh. Costs on parties. Writ petition allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 298 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e view, that the order of assessment in so far as it includes the cost of freight/delivery in the turnover of the petitioner, requires to be set aside, with a direction to the appropriate authority to determine the question afresh. Since investigation of facts is involved, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to remand the matter to the assessing authority to consider the question afresh in the light of the observations made herein. 12.. Consequently, the order of assessment as affirmed by the appellate authority and by the Appellate Tribunal, is set aside to the extent of the inclusion of the cost of freight in the taxable turnover of the petitioner and the assessing authority is directed to redetermine the question in the light of this order. The assessee shall be present through its representative before the assessing authority at Yadgir on 30th September, 1991, to take note of further proceedings. 13.. The revision petition is allowed accordingly. Petition allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 297 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... confirmed. We find from the order of the Tribunal that nothing irrelevant was taken into consideration nor anything relevant left out while deleting the penalty. The mere non-acceptability of an explanation of an assessee with regard to certain entries cannot ipso facto lead to a conclusion that the assessee had wilfully suppressed the turnover. But be that as it may, since the Tribunal did not find any wilful suppression on the part of the assessee to disclose the turnover, the exercise of discretion cannot be said to be perverse or non-judicious as to call for interference in exercise of the revisional powers of this Court. From the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the Tribunal exercised the discretion properly and judiciously, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. We therefore do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The revision fails and is dismissed but we make no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 296 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... , the revisional authority should have provided an opportunity to the writ petitioner to satisfy the revisional authority that the revision petitions should have been entertained by reason of the fact that the revision petitions have been filed by the writ petitioners before the amendment came into effect. The failure to issue notice and failure to provide opportunity to the writ petitioners vitiates the impugned order by reason of the fact that the well-known maxim of audi alteram partem was rejected to the petitioner so as to comply with the concept of principles of natural justice. 4.. In view of the above, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and it is quashed, but with the direction to the second respondent to entertain the revision petitions filed by the writ petitioners and to decide the matter on merits as per law held by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in similar matters. With these directions, the writ petitions are ordered. No costs. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 295 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL
... ...
... ... ..... ring Nos. RN-76 of 1990, RN-77 of 1990, RN-78 of 1990 and RN-79 of 1990 are, accordingly, allowed in part. The respondents are directed to return forthwith to the applicants in each of these cases the books of accounts and documents seized from the applicants in these cases on January 24, 1990. The two notices dated January 25, 1990, issued by the respondent No. 3, the Commercial Tax Officer, Salkia Charge, to the respondents Nos. 8 and 9 under section 11B of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, in Case No. RN-79 of 1990 are accordingly set aside. The prayers in Cases Nos. RN-78 of 1990 and RN-79 of 1990 for setting aside the notices dated January 30, 1990, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bally Circle, under section 7(4a)(i) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, are rejected. No order is made as to costs in any of these four cases. P.C. BANERJI (Technical Member).-I agree. L.N. RAY (Judicial Member).-I agree. Applications partly allowed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 294 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... pletely. The identity of lime shell is completely lost when it is burnt along with coal and after removing the coal dust, the product is crushed into powder. The goods, thus, consumed in the manufacture of other goods would normally fall within the ambit of section 7-A of the Act. The Joint Commissioner, therefore, rightly held that the lime shell purchased by the assessee from non-dealers which had not suffered tax as contemplated by section 7-A of the Act, had been consumed for the manufacture of lime powder and, therefore, the purchase turnover of Rs. 23,447 was required to be brought to assessment under section 7-A. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner had clearly fallen in error as he appears to have ignored the basic requirements of section 7-A of the Act. The order of the Joint Commissioner is, in our opinion, sound and, therefore, does not call for any interference. Consequently the appeal fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.
-
1991 (8) TMI 293 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is correct. The conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal to the effect that registration should be made effective from 17th June, 1976, i.e., from the date of application for grant of registration, in our view, cannot be sustained because on 17th June, 1976 the dealer had not incurred liability to pay tax under the Act. In other words, the registration certificate must take effect from the date of application or from the date of incurrence of liability to pay tax whichever is later. As regards the local Act, having regard to the provisions of subclause (ii) of sub-section (2) of section 3, we are again of the view that the certificate of registration granted under the local Act will also take effect from 21st June, 1976. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the question referred to this Court is answered in the negative and in favour of the sales tax authorities. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the negative.
-
1991 (8) TMI 292 - SUPREME COURT
What in service jurisprudence has come to be known as "sealed cover procedure"
What is the date from which it can be said that disciplinary/criminal proceedings are pending against an employee?
What is the course to be, adopted when the employee is held guilty in such proceedings if the guilt merits punishment other than that of dismissal?
To what benefits an employee who is completely or partially exonerated is entitled to and from which date?'
Held that:- Allow the appeal and set aside the finding of the Tribunal. If the Tribunal's finding is 'accepted it would mean that by giving him the Selection Grade w.e.f. July 30, 1986 he would stand rewarded notwithstanding his misconduct for the .earlier period for which disciplinary proceedings were pending at the time of the meeting of the DPC and for which again he was visited with a penalty.
-
1991 (8) TMI 291 - SUPREME COURT
Demand notice under section 156 - Held that:- Appeal dismissed. No reason to grant leave in these petitions which are, consequently, dismissed. We should, however, like to observe that, to avoid unnecessary controversies like this, the Department should, in future, adopt the salutary and useful practice of incorporating the entire tax calculations in I. T. N. S.. 65 Form itself or, in the alternative, make the I. T. N. S. 150 an annexure to form part of the assessment order, have it signed by the Income-tax Officer and have it served on the assessee along with I. T. N. S. 65. That will enable the assessee to have the full details necessary to enable him to file a proper appeal, if needed, against the order and demand.
-
1991 (8) TMI 290 - SUPREME COURT
Whether any action under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to be initiated or not?
Whether the laws are so petrified as to unable to respond to the challenges made will be dealt with in detail in our main judgment?
Held that:- Directions of Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla calling upon the CBI and the State to show cause as to why the proceedings initiated on the strength of the First Information Report dated 22.1.90 be not quashed, cannot be sustained. In the result, we agree with’ the first part of the Order dated 19.12.90 of Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla holding that Mr. H.S. Chowdhary and other intervening parties have no locus standi. We, however, set aside the second part of the impugned order whereby he has taken suo moto cognizance and issued show cause notice to the State and CBI and accordingly the Show cause notice issued by him is quashed. In view of the above conclusions, all the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the First Information Report dated 22.1.90 relating to Crime No. RCI(A)/90-ACU-IV on the file of the Special Judge, Delhi including the issuance of the letter rogatory/request as they stand now, remain unaffected and they can be proceeded with in accordance with law.
-
1991 (8) TMI 289 - DELHI HIGH COURT
IMPORT SALE DEALER IMPORTING GOODS PRODUCED BY SPECIFIC MANUFACTURER IN U.K. IMPORT LICENCE TAKEN ON BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY DGS & D GOODS SOLD TO ALL INDIA RADIO NO PRIVITY OF CONTRACT BETWEEN PURCHASER AND FOREIGN EXPORTER.
........
|
