Latest Cases

United Bleachers Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2006)(111)ECC259

.....of determination of acp of an independent textile processor, for the purpose of payment of duty under rule 96zq read with section 3a.one of the factors required to be considered in the context of determination of acp was mentioned in clause (i), which reads as under: (i) the number of chamber (of a hot-air stenter), each of which having a rail length of upto 3.05 meter on each side, installed in such factory shall be construed as one chamber and any fraction exceeding such rail length of any such chamber shall be computed on a pro-rata basis; in both the appeals, this provision has been misconstrued by the appellants. according to the appellants, only where a chamber has rail length of not less than 3.05 meter on each side, it could be treated as one chamber. it is said that each of the five chambers of the stenter in question had only rail length of 3.00 meter on each side and therefore it is claimed that it was not liable to be treated as one chamber and the acp should be determined on a pro-rata basis. learned consultant has reiterated this view of the appellants today. we have heard learned sdr also, who reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned orders.4. in terms.....

Cce Vs. K.G. Denim Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2006)(110)ECC265

.....these goods were subsequently cleared from the said division/depot, an additional amount of duty was paid as the depot price was higher than the factory price. at the time of such payment of duty also, deemed credit equivalent to 50% / 60% was availed in terms of the above notification, which was objected to by the department.show-cause notices were subsequently issued, covering different periods, by the department seeking to recover "extra" credit taken by the assessee at the time of removal of the goods from their depot. the demand was contested. in adjudication of the dispute; the original authority disallowed the deemed credits taken on the additional amounts of duty paid by the assessee at the time of clearance of the goods from their depot. it also imposed penalties on them. in the appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the original authority, learned commissioner (appeals) took the view that deemed credit of duty was admissible to them on the total excise duty paid by them.accordingly, the assessee's appeals were allowed. hence the present appeals of the revenue.2. the appellant is represented by ld. sdr, who reiterates the grounds stated in the memo.....

Bharat Dholpur Purva Sainik Vs. C.C.E.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2006)(110)ECC242

1. the applicants filed this application to waive the service tax of rs. 4,78,080/-. the contention of the applicant is that they are registered under a co-operative society act and is a government organization for the purpose of rehabilitating the ex-servicemen and widows of servicemen. they arrange various kinds of employment to the ex-servicemen and they are charging only 5% service charge. their contention is that they are not performing on commercial basis. the applicant also cited the case of kerala state ex-service league v. cce, thiruvananthapuram to submit that such organizations are not working on profit basis and are not commercial basis.2. in view of the above decision, the appellants have a strong case.the whole of the service tax is waived. the stay petition is allowed.

S.M.M. Steel Rerolling Mills Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

.....filed against order-in-appeal no. 325/2003 ce dated 15.12.2003 passed by the commissioner of central excise (appeals), cochin.2. the appellant manufacture articles of iron and steel. the commissioner of central excise fixed the duty liability for the period 1997-98 at rs. 42,00,000/- per annum. as per the relevant provisions of the central excise rules the appellants were required to pay duty of excise at the rate of rs. 750 per metric tonne at the time of clearance of their final products and the balance amount shall be paid on 31.3.1998. later this period was extended to 30.4.1998. when the compounded levy scheme was introduced the cenvat credit lying unutilized as on 1.9.97 stood lapsed. the appellant on the date of introduction of the compounded levy scheme i.e. 1.8.97 had a balance of rs. 10.80 lakhs in the cenvat credit. the appellants challenged the validity of section 3a before the hon'ble high court of kerala. the high court stayed the operation of the scheme and therefore, the appellants paid the duty of excise as per section 4 of the act. while paying excise duty they utilized modvat credit to the tune of rs. 5,13,118/-. later the validity of section 3a was upheld by.....

Shri Subhas Ghosh Vs. Happy Valley Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2006)133CompCas861

.....is : the petitioner was appointed as an agent for the company in september, 2000, authorizing him to sell and/or encourage for sale, of tea manufactured/to be manufactured by the company on a fee of rs. 15,000/-per month. at the behest of the directors of the company, the petitioner also advanced, at various times, a sum of money aggregating to rs. 11.00 lakhs to the company with an interest @ 24% per annum. since the directors of the company expressed their desire that the petitioner should become a shareholder, he applied for 16,000 equity shares of rs. 10/- each at a premium of rs. 2/- per share. he remitted rs. 1,92,000/- as consideration in various installments in the months of february/march, 2001. the company has acknowledged all these payments by money receipts indicating clearly that the same was advanced against allotment of equity shares.by a letter dated 15.3.01, the company informed the petitioner that in a board meeting held on 8.3.2001, the board had decided to enhance the issued equity shares of the company from 52,000 equity shares to 70,000 equity shares and that the enhanced equity shares would be issued to the petitioner or his nominee. it was also.....

Pratima Pal, Subhra Pal, Vs. Naba Press Pvt. Limited and ors.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2006)134CompCas617

.....applicable as the company is a private company and the question as to whether the petitioners received the offer letter, is a disputed question of fact, which cannot be determined in a petition under section 111. therefore, this petition should be dismissed. referring to dale & carrington investment pvt.ltd. v. p.k. prathapan, he pointed out that the allotment of shares was considered in a petition under section 397/398 and not in a petition under section 111. in tarsen kansil v. deb spinners ltd. 103 comp cas.835 the clb has held that there are disputed question of facts, the same should be adjudicated in a civil suit. in amonia suppliers corporation pvt. ltd. v. modern plastic containers pvt. ltd. also it has been held so. in view of the legal 5. in rejoinder, shri mukherjee submitted that the first letter dated 6.4.05 (annexure-p.7) confirmed that there was a board meeting on 30.3.05, but there was no mention about the allotment of shares. the said letter refers only two resolutions relating to increase in the remuneration of the directors and another matter. even the agenda sent on 8.3.2005 did not contain the business of allotment of shares.therefore, the alleged.....

Jimmy Jal Gazdar Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

.....against the impugned order. the board has only held that it has the jurisdiction to investigate into the alleged irregularities committed by the appellant under the regulations. the appellant should plead its case before the board on merits as well and let a final order be passed. in case the said order goes against the appellant, it would be open to him to challenge the same on all grounds available to him in accordance with law including the one that the board did not have the jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings. we are taking this view in the facts and circumstances of the case because we are of the opinion that all the disputes between the parties should be comprehensively decided by the board and that they should not be allowed to have them adjudicated piecemeal.

Chinta Mani Pandey Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

.....of the securities and exchange board of india (for short 'the board') whereby directions have been issued under section 12a of the securities contracts (regulation) act, 1956 read with section 11(4), 11b and 15hb of the act directing, amongst others, the magadh stock exchange (for short 'the exchange') to place the appellant under suspension and to hold disciplinary proceedings against him for the irregularities allegedly committed by him by allowing the promoters of m/s. bhoruka financial services limited to sell the shares held by them to m/s. dlf commercial developers limited on the platform of the exchange in contravention of the conditions of recognition granted by the board.the appeals filed by m/s. bhoruka financial services limited, its promoters and m/s. dlf commercial developers limited against the impugned order have already been allowed by us by our order dated 10/05/2006 on the ground that while the investigations ordered by the board were yet to commence, it had recorded firm findings against the appellants therein. same is the case with the appellant herein.however, the case of the appellant is slightly different from the case of the appellants in the earlier.....

Alankar Business Corporation Vs. the Dcit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (2007)105ITD629(Chennai)

.....courts. (3) the cit(a) is not correct in holding that the goodwill of rs. 3,00,00,000/- was assessable in the assessment year 1999-2000 on the mere fact that the money was received and the agreement signed in this year. the cit(a) failed to appreciate that goodwill, being an intangible asset ordinarily passes along with transference of the whole business as decided by the supreme court in the case of alapath venkataramiah v. cit (hybd) 57 itr 185 and the principles of right to receive the amount accrued to the appellant in the subsequent periods. the cit(a) failed to note that the goodwill of rs. 3 crore was assessed by the assessing officer in the assessment year 2002-03.3. in addition to above, permission of the bench has been sought to raise the following additional ground which is as under: on the facts and circumstances of the case the cit(a) ought to have considered the carry forward unabsorbed depreciation of rs. 7,84,18,940/- as current depreciation in view of the amendments to section 32(2) as amended by finance (no. 2) act, 1996 and also in view of the board's circular no. 762 dated 18.2.1998 and that such depreciation was available for set off against capital gains.5......

Abhi Developers Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

.....to section 94 of evidence act the affirmation before any court is rebutable by proving that admission or confession is irrelevant in view of the facts on record. reference has been made to the decision of hon. supreme court in the case of shri kishan v. kurukshetra university air 1976 sc 376 that admission made in ignorance of legal rights or without the knowledge of the correct facts does not bind the maker of admission and it is pleaded that similar view was expressed by itat in the decision in the case of ito v. ratan devi dugar (1987) 20 itd 483 (jp) and also by himachal pradesh high court in the case of satindar kumar (huf) v. cit .finally it is pleaded that as per valuation report the returned profits should be accepted.9. on the other hand, learned departmental representative relied on the orders of assessing officer and the commissioner (appeals).10. we have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. right from the stage 'of assessment the assessee has been relying on section 44ad of the act, the contents of which are as under: 44ad. (1) notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43c, in the case of.....