|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 587 Records
-
2004 (4) TMI 604 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... allenge Gujarat Act No.9 of 2002 by which the Bombay Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, as adopted in the State of Gujarat with up to date amendments, was further amended after the decision of the High Court which was rendered on 17th August, 2001. In fact, the main argument of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners is that the said amending Act merely rearranged the Sections and suffered from the same infirmity as the previous Act. Since we are of the opinion that the view taken by the High Court is not correct and Section 3A and Rule 5 of the Rules, as incorporated vide notification dated 6.2.2001 are intra vires and are perfectly valid, the challenge made to Gujarat Act No.9 of 2002 has no substance and must fail. 24. In the result, Civil Appeal Nos.6462-6464 of 2001 filed by the State of Gujarat are allowed and the impugned judgment and order dated 17.8.2001 of the High Court is set aside. Writ Petition Nos.249 and 252 of 2002 filed in this Court are dismissed. No costs.
-
2004 (4) TMI 603 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... aforementioned declaration, it goes without saying that he has a right to question the order of the Returning Officer in terms whereof he was not declared elected. A fortiorari he has also a right to question the correctness of the order of the Returning Officer as a result whereof he had not been declared elected. An election petition, therefore, would be maintainable. o p /o p CONCLUSION o p /o p We are, therefore, of the opinion that the High Court committed an error in interpreting the statutory provisions laying down procedures for declaration of result on the election of Adhyaksha Panchayat at district level. Applying the law as we have interpreted, the appellant should have been declared elected. o p /o p For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that in the instant case the appellant herein had received the highest number of first preference votes and in that view of the matter he should have been declared elected. o p /o p The appeal is allowed. o p /o p
-
2004 (4) TMI 602 - SUPREME COURT
Whether road rollers were not motor vehicles under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and hence no tax could be levied on road rollers?
-
2004 (4) TMI 601 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... , Aurangabad(supra referred by the Counsel, it has been categorically ruled bythe Apex Court that where duty had been paid under protest the claimfor refund of the same would not be hit by the bar of unjustenrichment. The ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court had beenfollowed by the Tribunal in Tecil Chemicals & Hydro Power Ltd.(supra). In view of this position of law, the doctrine of unjustenrichment could not be invoked for rejecting the claim of theappellants for refund of the duty which they paid under protest.Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals)confirming the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority,rejecting the claim of the appellants on the ground of unjustenrichment, is legally not maintainable, being contrary to the lawand as such, the same is set aside. 6. Consequently, the appeal of the appellants stands accepted withconsequential relief, if any, permissible under the law. (Operative part of the order announced in open court).
-
2004 (4) TMI 600 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... riod of 15 years on payment of certain amount calculated at the basis of monthly rent, which was payable in advance and to be adjusted towards the rent for every month. The lease granted to the assessee was the liberty to use the land for excavation purposes and subsidiary purposes. Considering the fact that there was payment once for all and distinguishing the case reported in Gotan Lime Syndicate v. CIT 1966 59 ITR 718 (SC), the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the expenditure was capital expenditure. The facts and circumstances of the case are almost similar to those of the aforesaid Supreme Court decision. Following the aforesaid decision, which had approved Pingle Industries Ltd. v. CIT 1960 40 ITR 67 (SC), we are of the opinion that on the facts and circumstances of the present case, the questions raised have to be answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. On the aforesaid conclusion, we dismiss the appeal. No costs.
-
2004 (4) TMI 599 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... und to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the notice is entitled to file objections for issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. 3. In the instant case, the reasons have already been supplied to the writ petitioner and, as conveyed to us, the return has also been filed by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee is required to prefer objections in view of the Apex Court judgment and the Assessing Officer is required to dispose of the same within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the objections. Interim relief already granted by this court will continue till the objections are disposed of by a speaking order, as indicated by the Apex Court. 4. The Assessing Officer will issue a notice to the assessee within a period of 15 days calling upon the assessee to file objections within a period of four weeks, if he so desires. 5. The petition stands disposed of with the above directions.
-
2004 (4) TMI 598 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... law. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment which is the minimum sentence. We are not inclined to modify the sentence by passing an order of the nature passed in N. Sukumaran Nair (supra) where this Court in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction imposed only a sentence of fine and directed the State to exercise its powers under Section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to commute the sentence of simple imprisonment for fine. In the instant case the appellant has been sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Moreover we are firmly of the view that strict adherence to Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the Rules framed thereunder is essential for safeguarding the interest of consumers of articles of food. Stringent laws will have no meaning if offenders could go away with mere fine. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the sentence imposed against the appellant. Finding no merit, we dismiss this appeal.
-
2004 (4) TMI 597 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... with development planning. It was further found therein that the land in question was required as buffer for maintaining the ecology balance. Such is not the position herein. Furthermore, the writ petition should not have been entertained keeping in view the fact that it was filed about three years after making of the allotment and execution of the deed of sale. The High Court should have dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches on the part of the first respondent. The Division Bench of the High Court also does not appear to have considered the plea taken by the appellant herein to the effect that the first respondent had been set up by certain interested persons. In a public interest litigation, the Court should, when such a plea is raised, determine the same. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. It is accordingly set aside. The appeal is allowed. The writ petition filed by the respondent stands dismissed. No costs.
-
2004 (4) TMI 596 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... h law. Section 80HHC(3) provides the mode of computation of eligible profit for deduction under section 80HHC. Even if there is no positive profit as computed as per clauses (a), (b) and (c) of section 80HHC(3) and there is a negative profit, the same has to be increased by 90 per cent of the incentives referred to in clauses (iiia), (iiib) and (iiic) of section 28 of the Act. It is nobody';s case that the export incentive received by the assessee does not fall within the ambit of items described in clauses (iiia), (iiib) and (iiic) to section 28 of the Act, therefore, export incentives have to be taken into account as per proviso to section 80HHC(3). This point of view is well supported by the Special Bench decision of Delhi Bench in the case of Lalsons Enterprises (supra). On this count also, the order under section 263 is not correct. 20. In the light of abovementioned factual and legal positions, we quash the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the assessee.
-
2004 (4) TMI 595 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... to ₹ 15,00,000/- cash deposit already made by the appellant, the appellant shall furnish a bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned for a sum of ₹ 5,00,000/- from a Nationalised Bank within three months from today. With the above direction the appeal is disposed of and if such bank guarantee of ₹ 5,00,000/- is furnished the tribunal shall proceed to hear the appeal on merits.
-
2004 (4) TMI 594 - SUPREME COURT
Whether respondent who earlier opted for voluntary retirement scheme could be permitted to withdraw therefrom after having received the payments under the scheme?
-
2004 (4) TMI 593 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... which was dismissed. It is against the said judgment, the appellants are in appeal before us. 2. A Bench of three Judges of this Court in Punjab National Bank v. Virender Kumar Goel , has held that an employee who sought voluntary retirement and subsequently wrote for its withdrawal but has withdrawn the amount of retiral benefits as per the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, is not entitled to the withdrawal of his application for voluntary retirement. It is not disputed that in the present case the respondent herein withdrew the amount of retiral benefits on January 25, 2001. 3. For the aforesaid reason, this appeal deserves to be allowed. We order accordingly. The order and judgment under challenge is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. C.A. Nos. 4099, 4100 of 2002 and 8833 of 2003 4. In view of the above order passed in C.A. No. 4098 of 2002, these appeals arc also allowed. The orders and judgments under challenge are set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2004 (4) TMI 592 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... against whom the information was lodged by the petitioner and thus having realised the amount, it is totally unfair on the part of the Union of India to state that they will make the payment only after the amount is received in cash from the person against whom the information was lodged by the informer, namely, the petitioner. 11. We are not quantifying any sum but, we are directing the respondent to make the payment of the final reward amount in terms of the policy. The amount shall be paid within a period of 15 days from the date on which a copy of this order is produced by the petitioner with interest at the rate of 15 per annum failing which the amount shall be paid at the rate of 18 per annum and the additional 3 per annum shall be borne by the responsible officer who is not taking immediate action in the matter. 12. The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent with costs which are quantified at ₹ 10,000/- which shall be deposited within a period of two weeks.
-
2004 (4) TMI 591 - SUPREME COURT
Whether there is a relation between the State and the alleged holder of the post?
Whether disciplinary proceedings against R-1 regarding her unauthorized absence from duty?
-
2004 (4) TMI 590 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... uct being manufactured by the petitioner-Company. 10. Accordingly, the respondents are restrained from recovering excise duty from the petitioner Company on Agricultural Knapsack Sprayer Engine being manufactured by the petitioner-Company otherwise than at the rate at which the Central Excise authorities are recovering excise duty from the manufacturers of the same product in other States. 11. Since this interim relief is being granted mainly for the reason indicated in para 8 above, it will be open to the Central Board of Excise and Customs to consider the matter afresh for giving uniform treatment to the manufacturers of the same product all over the country. It will be open to the respondent authorities to move this Court for appropriate orders after the Central Board of Excise and Customs takes appropriate decision in the matter. It is expected that the Central Board shall take a decision as aforesaid within four months from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court.
-
2004 (4) TMI 589 - SUPREME COURT
Whether 563 articles lying in 'Toshakhana' (Treasury of the State of Jammu & Kashmir) can be declared as the private property of the appellant or this issue deserves fresh determination by Government of India or it be referred to arbitration for adjudication?
-
2004 (4) TMI 588 - SUPREME COURT
Interpretation of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the relevant provisions of Legal Remembrancer's Manual relating to appointment and renewal of term of the District Government Counsel
Whether the High Court was right in its direction in the light of Special Reference No.1 of 1998 that a collegium should be constituted?
-
2004 (4) TMI 587 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the provisions of the impugned notification dated 31st December, 1999, except paragraph 3(b), are held valid and intra vires?
-
2004 (4) TMI 586 - SUPREME COURT
Whether impugned judgment a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court while upholding that the respondent- accused's conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was in order, further held him to be entitled to the benefits available under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code') legally correct?
-
2004 (4) TMI 585 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
... ...
... ... ..... l or a cinema theatre cannot be given depreciation as permissible in case of ‘plant’. 4. Mr. Singhi has also brought to our notice that the issue whether sanitary fittings such as electric fittings and installa tion of call bell etc. can be treated as part of the plant, that issue has been considered by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Hoechst Dyes & Chemicals (P.) Ltd. 1999 240 ITR 12 , wherein the Bombay High Court has taken the view that the electric fittings and installation of call bell, indicators etc. could not construe/plant. 5. Following the view taken in the aforesaid decisions of the Apex Court and Bombay High Court, in our view the Tribunal has committed an error in treating hotel building as a plant and also the sanitary fittings as part of the plant. 6. In the result, we answer the question in negative i.e. in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The reference application stands disposed of accordingly. In favour of revenue
........
|
