|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 187 Records
-
1988 (6) TMI 331 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... before 17-6-1988. The Rule applies to all existing employees in service on the date of the amendment of the rules. So far as the age of superannuation is concerned, it obviously governs the future right in the matter of retirement and does not affect those who have already retired from service before 17-6-1988 The decisions relied on are of no assistance to the petitioners as no vested right is affected with retrospective effect. There is no substance in the contention that rule 200 as now substituted is bad as encroaching upon judicial power. For the reasons stated above, this Original Petition fails and is dismissed. Dismissed. 13. We do not consider this a fit case for certificate for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court as in our opinion no substantial question of law of general importance which needs to be decided by the Supreme Court arises for consideration as the case is fully covered by the well-recognised principles laid down by the Supreme Court. 14. Leave Refused.
-
1988 (6) TMI 330 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... the respondent undertaking to be bound by the opinion of CLRI, Madras. In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed. We make it clear that we express no opinion on the merits of the case.
-
1988 (6) TMI 329 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to section 3(1) of the Entry Tax Act. 4.. The Tribunal was apparently wrong in applying the provisions of clause (b) of section 5-B of the Act, because the coal imported by the assessee was not subjected to tax at the rate of 4 per cent and further because clause (b) of section 5-B of the Act did not speak about the general rate of tax in respect of the declared goods, but spoke of declared goods subjected to tax at the rate of 4 per cent. 5.. In the result, we answer the question referred to us as follows Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee was not liable to pay tax on entry of coal as per clause (iii) of first proviso to subsection (1) of section 3 of the Entry Tax Act, because it had paid 3 per cent tax and frac12 per cent additional tax and because its case was covered by clause (c), and not by clause (b) of section 5-B of the Act. 6.. In the circumstance of the case, we make no order as to costs of this reference. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1988 (6) TMI 328 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Vasudeo Rao 1981 48 STC 447. Having regard to the process involved in preparation of these blocks as set out in para 3 of the Tribunal s order, we hold that it is a works contract and, therefore, not exigible to tax during the relevant assessment year. The tax revision case fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 327 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the Central Sales Tax Act. Accordingly, the first question is answered against the petitioner. So far as the fourth question is concerned, it is clear from the judgment of the Tribunal that manganese slag is an entirely different product, commercially speaking. In the commercial world, it is treated as a different product from manganese ore or for that matter, from ferromanganese. It is a bye-product having altogether different use. The material placed before us shows that even the petitioner treated the manganese slag as separate goods and showed their turnover separately. See Khandelwal Ferro Alloys Limited v. State of A.P. 1989 72 STC 270 (AP). In view of the said finding of the Tribunal, we see no reason to treat the manganese slag as synonymous with manganese ore. We agree with the Tribunal on the fourth question as well. In view of the findings recorded by us, the tax revision cases are dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 1,000 (consolidated). Petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 326 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... had been collected from the purchaser, it should have been and would have been included in the turnover or the sale price, as the case may be. But in this case, it is not so included as explained above. Nor can it be said in this case that the reimbursement of excise duty by the Government under the Supplementary Cash Assistance Scheme was on behalf of or on account of the purchaser. The said scheme was evolved by the Central Government in the larger interests of the industry and commerce and not merely or exclusively with a view to help the purchaser of electrical goods from the assessee herein. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in holding that in such a situation the excise duty component cannot be included in the turnover of the assessee. It cannot be said that the sale price charged by the assessee-respondent herein included excise duty. For the above reasons, the tax revision case fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 325 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d two decisions . We cannot do any better. 11.. Thus, there is no substance in either of the contentions of Mr. Srinivasan and in the result, we dismiss the writ petitions. 12.. We have decided only the questions raised before us in relation to the constitutional validity of the provisions. However, the petitioners have also sought for certain other reliefs but those questions cannot be gone into unless the authorities also examine the matters. The petitioners are also aggrieved by the show cause notice issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in revision proceedings under section 22-A of the Act and it is at that stage, the petitioners filed the writ petitions before this Court. The petitioners are at liberty to file the objections, if they have not yet filed it already, within a period of 30 days from today to the said notices and shall also appear before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes on July 15, 1988 and take further date of hearing. Writ petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 324 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ent disclose that it was the intention of the recovering authority to recover only a reasonable amount by withholding from the petitioner s salary a sum to the extent that was reasonable, it is unnecessary to consider the petitioner s contention that the section, as it stands, is unconstitutional. In so far as the second respondent is deemed to have intended to recover under section 25 only to the extent that it is permissible under section 226(2) of the Income-tax Act, I direct respondents 2 and 3 to recover from the petitioner s salary only to the extent that such recovery would be consistent with the extent of recovery of salary recognised under section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 5.. The original petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs. 6.. The fate of this original petition shall have no impact either on the petitioner s appeal stated to be pending before the concerned authority or upon the permissible modes of recovery under law. Petition allowed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 323 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e restrictions which are provided under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are not provided in subsection (4) of section 14. He relied upon the decisions of the Madras High Court and Kerala High Court rendered with reference to similar language in Madras and Kerala Acts, viz., Yercaud Coffee Curing Works Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu 1977 40 STC 531 (Mad.), F.K. Hasheeb and Co. v. State Of Madras 1966 17 STC 38 (Mad.), East India Corporation Ltd. v. State of Madras 1973 31 STC 330 (Mad.), State of Madras v. Louis Dreyfus and Company Ltd. 1955 6 STC 318 (Mad.) FB and Narayana Shenoi v. State of Kerala 1961 12 STC 665 (Ker) in support of his contention. Undoubtedly there is good amount of force in this contention of the learned Government Pleader but, in view of our opinion on the second question, we do not think it necessary to go into this aspect in this case. This tax revision case accordingly fails and is dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 322 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... different forms in which manganese is used in the iron and steel making industry. That is how it is understood in the commercial world, as would be evident from the material referred to above. Mr. T. Anantha Babu contended that ferro manganese is merely a purer form of manganese ore, wherein the content of manganese is enhanced, and the content of other unnecessary elements is reduced. For the above reasons, we hold that ferro manganese is taxable at the last point of purchase as provided in entry 1 of the Second Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and, therefore, the assessees/dealers herein cannot be made liable under section 5(1) of the Act. In view of the above opinion of ours, no other question arises. Accordingly, T.R.C. Nos. 228, 229, 232, 235, 225 and 226 of 1987 are dismissed but without costs. T.R.C. Nos. 176 to 181 of 1986 are also dismissed since it is unnecessary to consider the other contentions. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 1,500 consolidated.
-
1988 (6) TMI 321 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... extracting the entry from the order of the Tribunal about the correctness of which there is no dispute before us.) Rayon or artificial silk fabrics means all varieties of fabrics manufactured either wholly or partly from rayon or artificial silk and includes embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs, fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparations of cellulose derivatives or of other artificial plastic materials. A reading of this definition shows that artificial silk fabrics include, inter alia, fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparations of cellulose derivatives or of other artificial plastic materials. In this case it is clear from a look at the product that it is a case where a fabric is coated with artificial plastic material. It, therefore, clearly falls within item 5 of the Fourth Schedule of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act. For this reason, we agree with the conclusion of the Tribunal and dismiss the T.R.C. No costs. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 320 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... spose of their scrap and other unusable articles are held to be dealers and exigible to tax vide District Controller of Stores v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer 1976 37 STC 423 (SC) . Mr. Dasaratharama Reddi relied upon two Calcutta decisions reported in Chief Commercial Superintendent v. Member, Board of Revenue 1973 32 STC 171 and Cementation Patel v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes 1981 47 STC 385. The principle of both these decisions is that if the main, i.e., essential activity carried on by a person is not business, any incidental or ancillary transaction too would not be business, and cannot also be taxed. The principle of these decisions can have no application in this case since the main activity carried on by the petitioner herein is business , though not taxable under the Act. For the above reasons, the tax revision cases are dismissed but, in the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 500 consolidated. Petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 319 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... se 1954 26 ITR 1 AIR 1954 SC 545, and reiterated in K.T. Moopil Nair s case AIR 1961 SC 652. The deprivation of an appellate remedy against an imposition of tax renders such provision unconstitutional and also open to challenge as arbitrary and unreasonable and, therefore, violative of article 14. The impugned provisions which impose a fixed rate of tax irrespective of whether the exhibitor has run the shows or not for various reasons, introduces an unscientific and arbitrary method of assessment. What is more, it does not fit into the scheme of levy of entertainment tax under the Act which is levied either on each admission or on each show. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, section 4B of the Act under which the tax is levied on video shows is liable to be struck down. The writ petitions are accordingly allowed, and section 4B of the Act is declared unconstitutional. The State Government is given three months time to give effect to this ruling. Writ petitions allowed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 318 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ough it may be possible by an involved process of reasoning to include the television set also within the meaning of wireless reception instrument and apparatus. Since we have to understand these entries in the common or in the commercial parlance we are inclined to hold that television sets or parts and accessories thereof were not taxable under entry 3 of the First Schedule to the Act prior to 1st September, 1976. We may also add that these two cases are some sort of solitary cases. Actually the television was introduced in this State in the year 1977 only and all sales of televisions or their parts and accessories would take place only after 1st September, 1976. These cases arose because the dealer herein is a manufacturer of accessories and parts of television which he was selling to E.C.I.L. E.C.I.L. manufactures televisions which it was evidently selling mostly outside the State at that time. The tax revision cases fail and are dismissed. No costs. Petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 317 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... es Tax Act, in the light of the decision of this Court in Anand Wire and Allied Industries case 1979 43 STC 273. But, it was argued that this is a matter which is still pending before the Supreme Court. It is also stated that the earlier decision of this Court in Anand Wire and Allied Industries case 1979 43 STC 273 requires reconsideration. 3.. We are of the view that in view of a Bench decision of this Court in Anand Wire and Allied Industries case 1979 43 STC 273, the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (first appellate authority) as also the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal were justified in law in holding that the staywires used for supporting electric posts cannot be said to be accessories to electrical goods and they cannot be taxed under entry 26 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding so. 4.. No interference is called for in these tax revision cases. They are dismissed, in limine. Petitions dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 316 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cable to radios was also held applicable to T.V. sets. The Tribunal also referred to a decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Ambala Coach Builders v. State of Haryana 1977 39 STC 44 wherein it was held that a bus body mounted on motor chassis is neither an accessory nor a spare part but a component part of the motor vehicle. In our opinion the Tribunal was right in saying so. There cannot be a functioning T.V. without the wooden cabinet. A television normally is understood as the set fixed within the wooden cabinet. It cannot, therefore, be called as a spare part or an accessory-as those words are understood and construed by this Court and other High Courts. Once it is held that wooden cabinet of a television is a component of T.V., it cannot be taxed under entry 3 of the First Schedule. It means that it can be taxed only as general goods under section 5(1). The tax revision case accordingly fails and is dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 315 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t in cases of sales effected by transfer of documents of title to the goods, the mere shipping of the goods, after the goods had gone through the customs barriers , would not constitute the goods having crossed the customs frontiers and that it is only after the goods have crossed the frontiers the title to the property passes on. These decisions are of no help to the respondent for the reason that admittedly the dealers had sold the barytes powder packed in the gunnies sold by the respondent to the MMTC for being exported to the foreign buyer. In the result, we hold that the sales effected by the respondent to the dealers are neither ultimate nor penultimate ones so as to constitute sales in the course of export for purposes of enabling the respondent to lay a claim invoking the benefit of section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act. The revision is accordingly allowed and the order of Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is set aside. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Petition allowed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 314 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... fabrics- (a) if it contains 40 per cent or more by weight of wool (b) if it contains 40 per cent or more by weight of silk (c) if it contains 60 per cent or more by weight of rayon or artificial silk or (d) if manufactured on a handloom. It would be immediately evident from a perusal of above item 19 that the entry was altogether differently worded at that time. In particular, the words cotton fabrics subjected to the process of rubberising found in item 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Act 58 of 1957 (which has since replaced item 19 referred to in the Gujarat judgment) were not there. In our opinion, because of the said words, we must hold that even though the cotton is superimposed with rubber, it still remains a cotton fabric, particularly when two-thirds of it is cotton and one-third rubber. It is essentially a cotton fabric subjected to a process of rubberising. For the above reasons, the T.R.C. is dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 150. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 313 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n accessory. It is an integral and essential part of the transformer. It would, therefore, be not an accessory. The Deputy Commissioner has observed that even without a radiator a transformer can function, though for a much shorter period. This is taking a very unrealistic view. For that matter even a motor car can run without a radiator for a short distance. But, then it would heat up and get bogged down. Same must be the situation with a transformer. We must take a normal functioning transformer and see whether it can function properly without a radiator. The Deputy Commissioner has not stated that a transformer can function in the normal course without a radiator. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in holding that the radiators cannot be taxed under item 38 as it stood then, but it must be taxed as general goods under section 5(1). The revision accordingly fails and it is dismissed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 600. Petition dismissed.
-
1988 (6) TMI 312 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... whereas in entry 19 containers other than gunnies and bottles are mentioned. Therefore, they fall under entry 19 of the First Schedule. By seeing both the entries, it is clear that under entry 67 hessian cloth and jute twine are only taxable and there is no mention regarding hessian cloth bags. Therefore, it cannot be held that they fall under entry 67. Under entry 19 of the First Schedule, containers other than gunnies and bottles are taxable. Therefore, they are liable to be taxed under entry 19 of the First Schedule as a container for the loading of chemicals. Therefore, the revision case is allowed and the order of the Tribunal is set aside. No costs. Petition allowed.
........
|
