|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 491 Records
-
2002 (10) TMI 820 - CESTAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... ment with the above view of the Commissioner (Appeals). It is seen that the Tribunals decision in the case of Shree Pipes Ltd. relied upon by the original adjudicating authority has been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court when the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. We also note that the Tribunal in the case of General Engg. Works v. Collector (order No.54-55/96-A) has held that value of inspection charges for inspecting the goods manufactured by the assessees, by RITES (an agency of the Indian Railways) at the instance of the railways was not to be included in the assessable value. The appeal filed by the Commissioner against the above order of the Tribunal has since been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 1997 ELT A-141. Inasmuch as the issue stands decided in favour of the appellants we dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of the duty and allow the appeals itself. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. Dictated in the Court.
-
2002 (10) TMI 819 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... nspiring confidence in the investors. An independent fact finding investigation into the complaint would be in tune with the said objective. 159. For the reasons stated above SEBI's finding that regulation 12 is not attracted requires reconsideration. SEBI is directed to properly investigate the question as to whether Ambujas acquired control over ACC as a result of acquisition of shares held by Tata group companies and in the light of the investigation, decide further course of action, if any, required. For the purpose the matter is remanded. 160. I would like to make it clear that SEBI shall not be influenced in its investigation or decision making in any manner by the observations made by the Tribunal in this order. All the contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. It is expected that the complainants and the other Respondents herein would extend full co-operation to SEBI in its investigation into the matter. 161. The appeal is disposed of in the above lines.
-
2002 (10) TMI 818 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... r. D. Banerjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. A.T. Patra, Adv., Mr. Anand Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Rajat Bhalla, Adv., M/s. O.P. Khaitan & Co.,Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. ORDER The special leave petition is dismissed.
-
2002 (10) TMI 817 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ved on him. As already noticed, Hari Singh appeared and save and except the bald statement that registered letter was not tendered to him, no evidence whatsoever was led to rebut the presumption. He could have examined the postman, who would have been the material witness and whose evidence would have bearing for proper adjudication. He has failed to discharge the onus cast upon him by the Statute. This apart, it is inherently improbable that the registered summons were duly served on Basant Singh but not to Hari Singh when they occupied the tenanted premises jointly. 12. As noticed above, the registered summons were to Basant Singhand Hari Singh vide postal receipt Nos. 875 and 876 dated 24.4.1986 on the correct and given address is borne out from the record. Ex-parte proceedings were ordered on 22.8.1986 and ex-parte decree was passed on30.9.1986. 13. In the facts and circumstances as noticed above, this appeal is devoid of merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 816 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... principle of law. An order made to merely dispose of the case before court by issuing certain directions on the facts and for the purposes of the said case, cannot have the value or effect of any binding precedent and particularly in the teeth of the decision in Jasmer Singh's case (supra). 14. For all the reasons stated above, the appeals are allowed and the orders of the High Court are set aside insofar as the pay equal to that of the regular employed staff has been ordered to be given to the N.M.R./daily wager/casual workers, as indicated above, to which they will not be eligible or entitled, till they are regularized and taken as the permanent members of the establishment. For the period prior to such permanent status-regularization, they would be entitled to be paid only at the rate of the minimum wages prescribed or notified, if it is more than what they were being paid as ordered by this Court in Jasmer Singh's case (supra). There will be no order as to costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 815 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e being the position, we find no substance in the plea that evidence of eye witnesses is not sufficient to fasten guilt by application of Section 149. So far as the observations made in Kamaksha Raj's case (supra), it is to be noted that the decision in the said case was rendered in a different factual scenario altogether. There is always peril in treating the words of a judgment as though they are words in a legislative enactment, and it is to be remembered that judicial utterances are made in the setting of the facts of a particular case. Circumstantial flexibility, one additional or different fact may make a world of difference between conclusions in two cases (See Padamasundara Rao (dead) and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. 2002 255ITR147(SC) ). It is more so in a case where conclusions relate to appreciation of evidence in a criminal trial, as was observed in Krishna Mochi's case (supra). 30. The inevitable result of this appeal is dismissal which we direct.
-
2002 (10) TMI 814 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... factors specified in section 15J appears to be baseless. The scope of section 15J has already been discussed in Cabot case extracted above, and as such I am not repeating the same again here. The Adjudicating Officer himself has stated in the order that he has taken into consideration the factors mentioned in section 15J. The fact that he has imposed only a sum of Rs. one lakh as penalty, though the failure continues from 4.1.2001 till date itself, is indicative of the fact that he has taken a very reasonable stand in imposing the penalty. The principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel cited by Shri Khambatta is not applicable to this case, as the Appellant has not filed the report even today, despite the fact of holding more than 5% in the company's capital was brought to its notice, as back in July 2001 by RBI. 68. For the reasons stated above, three appeals bearing nos. 27/2002, 28/2002 and 30/2002 allowed and appeal no. 31/2002 dismissed.
-
2002 (10) TMI 813 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... her does not arise. There is scope of harmonizing both in a manner indicated supra. 2. Article 174 is not relatable to a dissolved Assembly. Similar is the position under Article 85 vis-a-vis House of People. Merely because the time schedule fixed under Article 174 cannot be adhered to, that per se cannot be the ground for bringing into operation Article356. 3. As Article 174 does not deal with election, the question of Election Commissioner taking the aid, assistance or co-operation of the Center or the State Governments or to draw upon their resources to hold the election does not arise. On the contrary for effective operation of Article 324 the Election Commission can do so to ensure holding of free and fair election. The question whether free and fair election is possible to be held or not has to be objectively assessed by the Election Commission by taking into consideration all relevant aspects. Efforts should be to hold the election and not to defer holding of election.
-
2002 (10) TMI 812 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... observations made in the order of the Tribunal dt. 22nd April, 1998, or 1st June, 1999, and the order of the High Court dt. 17th Nov., 2000. (3) The Tribunal will take into consideration retrospective amendments made in the year 2002. (4) The CIT(A) to hear and dispose of the appellant's appeal against the regular assessment order dt. 31st March, 1998, without taking into consideration the observations contained in the order of the High Court dt. 17th Nov., 2000 (supra). It would be open to the appellant to raise all contentions which are available to it in law. The CIT(A) will take into consideration retrospective amendments made in the year 2002. (5) Both the Tribunal and the CIT(A) are requested to decide the matters within 2 months. (6) Upto 30th Nov., 2002, the Department not to take any coercive action for recovery. Meantime, it would be open to the appellant to approach the Appropriate Authority for interim relief. 2. Both the appeals stand disposed of accordingly.
-
2002 (10) TMI 811 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nction in mind and cancelled the bail in a mechanical manner. Thus, in our view, the High Court committed a manifest and serious error in passing the impugned orders setting aside the anticipatory bail granted to the appellants by the order dated 9.4.2001 as confirmed by the order dated 5.6.2001 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. The impugned orders of the High Court under the circumstances are unsustainable. It is needless to state that the observations made either by learned Addl. Sessions Judges or the High Court or this Court in dealing with the matter relating to grant of anticipatory bail do not impair or injure the prosecution case or prejudice the defence at the trial. Further, nothing said or observed by the High Court or this Court shall be taken as any expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Hence, we set aside the impugned orders and restore the order dated 5.6.2001 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rewari. The appeals are allowed accordingly.
-
2002 (10) TMI 810 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... g before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta, and as such, there will be no impediment on the part of the authorities to proceed with the case without being influenced by the orders passed in these cases. 51. In the result, the first information reports and the investigations impugned in these six cases are hereby quashed. The revisional applications are allowed. Let this order do govern the fate of all the six cases pending in this Court. 52. Learned counsel for the petitioners is hereby given liberty to communicate this order to the Special Officer. 53. Let the ordering portion of this order be communicated to the Courts below by a special messenger at the cost of the petitioner to be deposited by tomorrow. 54. Since the Puja Vacation is offing, let a xerox plain copy of the operative portion of the judgment duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) or Assistant Court Officer be given to the learned counsel for the parties on usual undertaking.
-
2002 (10) TMI 809 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nstruments Act are upheld (c) But the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner he is sentenced under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to under go simple imprisonment for a period of one month. (d) He is further directed to pay an amount of ₹ 3,10,000 (Rupees Three Lakhs Ten Thousand) as compensation under Section 357(3) Crl. P.C. In default of payment of compensation he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of sixty days. 20. The revision petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 1.1.2003 for execution of the modified sentence hereby imposed. Needless to mention, the learned Magistrate shall be at liberty to initiate proceedings against the accused and his sureties if he does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed. The Registry shall forthwith send back the records to the trial court.
-
2002 (10) TMI 808 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... it was held that the brand name of 'Mahan Taste Maker' is different from 'Mahan' which is the brand name of Mahan Foods Ltd. Similar views were held by the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Meet Electronics (supra) where the Appellants were manufacturing Radio Cassettes Recorders and affixing the brand name 'Meet National'. The Tribunal has held that the 'Meet National' is not a registered trade name of anybody else and allowed the benefit of the Notification No. 175/86. We also find substance in the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the usage of the name 'Tata' in the brand name is with a view to indicate that the part is for a particular vehicle manufactured by Tata. Following the ratio of the above mentioned decision, we find no infirmity in the impugned Order and accordingly we reject the Appeal filed by the Revenue. The Cross Objections filed by the Respondents also stand disposed of as no other plea has been made therein.
-
2002 (10) TMI 807 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... uch circumstances is involved which the defendant would presume wish to test in Appeal. (ii) On such deposit being made, the suit be transferred to the list of commercial causes. The defendant shall file its written statement within a period of six weeks thereafter. Discovery and inspection to be completed within further six weeks thereafter. (iii) In the event of the amount being deposited as aforesaid, the Prothonotary and Senior Master to deposit the said amount in a Nationalised Bank initially for a period of one year and thereafter for equal successive periods till the disposal of the suit. (iv) On the failure of the defendant to deposit the aforesaid amount or furnishing the guarantee as aforesaid, liberty to the plaintiff to apply for further orders. Summons for judgment is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Parties to act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this Court. Certified copy expedited.
-
2002 (10) TMI 806 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... . Question No. (iii) Again, this question proceeds on the assumption that the provisions of Article 174(1) also apply to a dissolved Assembly. In view of our answer to question No. (i), we have already reported that Article 174(1) neither applies to a prematurely dissolved Legislative Assembly nor does it deal with elections and, therefore, the question that the Election Commission is required to carry out the mandate of Article 174(1) of the Constitution does not arise. Under Article 324, it is the duty and responsibility of the Election Commission to hold free and fair elections at the earliest. No efforts should be spared by the Election Commission to hold timely elections. Ordinarily, law and order or public disorder should not be occasion for postponing the elections and it would be the duty and responsibility of all concern to render all assistance, cooperation and aid to the Election Commission for holding free and fair elections. The Reference is answered accordingly.
-
2002 (10) TMI 805 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... We hold that the beneficiaries of the trust in these circumstances cannot be regarded as an Association of persons, as they have not joined together to earn income. They are entitled to receive the income in fixed proportion by virtue of the deed of trust. In other words, they have not associated themselves to earn income from the trust property to regard them as an Association of persons. The Bombay High Court in CIT v. Marsons Beneficiary Trust 1990 188 ITR 224 in similar circumstances has held that where the assessee is a private trust and the shares of the beneficiaries are known and certain, the beneficiaries are not an Association of persons. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed in the said decision and accordingly we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. We answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 804 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 2 of the 'Act' was confined to rectification of any mistake in the order which is apparent on the face of record and not in the error of the judgment. The mistake must appear at a glance apparent on the record and not a mistake which may be presumed or emerge in the form of a different perception or opinion as an outcome after a prolonged debate on the merits of the question or issue already adjudicated upon." 5. In view of the above observations it becomes clear that the provisions of Section 22 of the 'Act' was confined to rectification of mistake apparent on the face of the record and not in respect of rectification/modification in the error of the judgment. In the present case no error appears which could be corrected under Section 22 of the 'Act' because the case has already been heard and adjudicated upon. Therefore, the prayers made in the said application cannot be entertained, therefore, the present rectification application is dismissed.
-
2002 (10) TMI 803 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on in the case of CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons 1999 235 ITR 491 wherein the Court has held that business expenditure incurred by the assessee on maintenance of the building cannot be treated as a perquisite within the meaning of section 40(c) of the Act. Following the said decision, we answer the first question of law referred to us in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 3. As far as the second question of law referred to us is concerned, learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the said question has to be answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue in view of the decision in CIT v. Jameel Leathers & Uppers 2000 246 ITR 97 (Mad.). Following the said decision, we hold that excise duty incentive does not qualify for deduction under section 80HH of the Act and accordingly the second question is answered in the negative in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
2002 (10) TMI 802 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... appeal also would be entitled to the benefits, to the extent such benefits have been allowed in favour of the appellants in the other appeals, and nothing more. If the order of the High Court purports to give anything more than what was held permissible in respect of others, the order in W.A. No. 931 of 1997 shall stand modified to bring it in conformity with our decision in the connected appeals. 18. Consequently the appellants shall work out the monetary benefits as are due to the respondent in this appeal in the light of the Judgment rendered by us in the connected appeals i.e. CA Nos. 2652-54 of 1995 etc., it is also made clear that the claim of the respondents is sustained only to the extent of availing the monetary benefits and not for any substantive appointment to the post of School Assistants, as such. With this clarification of the correct position of law and modification in the light of the other judgment rendered by us, this appeal shall stand finally disposed of.
-
2002 (10) TMI 801 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)
... ...
... ... ..... arned Single Judge of the High Court of Kerala has committed an impropriety by expressing that the said legal direction of this Court should not be followed by the sub-ordinate Courts in Kerala. We express our disapproval of the course adopted by the said Judge in Rajendran v. Jose 2001(3) K L T 431. It is unfortunate that when the Sessions Judge has correctly done a course in accordance with the discipline the Single Judge of the High Court has incorrectly reversed it.” 14. In view of the mandate issued by the Supreme Court in Suganthi Suresh Kumar's case (supra) the imposition of jail sentence in default of payment of compensation awarded by the Courts below under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is well within the purview of law. 15. After overall consideration of factual and legal position involved in the case, and keeping in view the revisional powers of this Court, this Court finds no substance in the revision. Therefore, the same is dismissed.
........
|
