Reported in : [2003]129STC427(Mad)
.....tribunal, pondicherry dated 5.11.1992 made in tax appeal no. 1 of 1992 on the following questions of law 1. whether the respondent, who is manufacturing liquid chlorine in another factory taken on lease is entitled to the benefit of exemption permissible as per the government's notification in g.o.ms. no. 15/74/fin.(ct) dated 25th june, 1974 of the finance department, pondicherry? and 2. whether the respondent, which is manufacturing ''brine'' (using 'salt' and other chemicals) a new product having a distinct name, character and use is entitled to claim the benefit of tax exemption provided to 'salt' in entry no. 10 of schedule iii of the pgst act, 1967?' 2. the respondent is an assessee in the books of commercial tax officer (iac), pondicherry and was an industrial undertaking manufacturing caustic soda, chlorine gas, hydro chloric acid (100 percent) and calcium hydro chlorite under licence issued by the government of india, new delhi. the industry has commenced production in their factory at kalapet with effect from 2.7.1985. for the assessment year 1988-89, the respondent have reported the total and taxable turnover of rs.95,70,369-85ps and rs.71,118-76ps claiming.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2003(27)PTC409(Mad)
.....the contentions of both the learned counsel.9. the case being one regarding the infringement of the trade mark, there is no need to discuss the facts elaborately. the only consideration is to compare both the trade marks and to find out as to whether the similarities are more or the dissimilarities are more and further as to whether the dis-similarities are more visible, by which, the trade mark can be differentiated without any difficulty. the trade mark of the respondent is with the letters 'eyetex' with a drawing of an eye above the trade mark. the appellant's trade mark is also with the letters 'eyesee' with an eye above the trade mark.10. even though there is some difference in the words 'eyetex' and 'eyesee' phonetically, but, still, it is not known as to whether the unwary purchaser could differentiate the same while purchasing the commodity. when the commodities of both the parties are compared with the containers, there is no difficulty for us to conclude that there is every possibility that the unwary purchaser is likely to be deceived and the similarities are more than the dis-similarities. even in respect of the dis-similarities pointed out by the learned counsel.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2003)181CTR(Mad)344; [2003]263ITR371(Mad)
.....of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the lands held by the assessee had not been converted into stock-in-trade 2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in rejecting the alternate claim of the assessee regarding the computation of capital gains on transfer of lands ?' the asst. yrs. are 1982-83 and 1983-84. 2. the facts as stated in the statement of case are as follows : the assessee was a private limited company engaged in textile business. from the asst. yr. 1982-83, it claimed that it had started business in real estate by converting part of its vacant land into stock-in-trade to carry on the business of real estate. in order to prove the same, it was contended that a resolution to that effect was passed on 1st jan., 1981, and entries have been made in the books of account. it was also claimed that the proceedings of the resolution was recorded in the minutes, duly signed by the chairman, that the minutes so recorded was filed with the registrar of companies on 11th jan., 1983, that as per the entries made in the books of account, the property alleged to have been converted into stock-in-trade was valued at the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2003]129TAXMAN745(Mad)
.....bench, in its order dated 23-11-1998 made in i.t.a. no. 680 (mad) of 1990.2. the question of law raised in the appeal is as follows'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal is correct in law in allowing the deduction of rs. 7,00,435 as revenue expenditure ?'3. the assessment year involved is 1985-86. in a similar set of facts, in the assessee's own case, in respect of the assessment year 1988-89 in t.c. no. 47 of 1998 this court has remitted the matter back to the tribunal on the ground that there was no materials produced as regards the moderanisation expenditure, expenditure on current repairs and replacement of worn out parts as contended by the assessee were made out in accordance with the instructions given by the director of handlooms. the assessee might be given an opportunity to place those instructions which had not been placed before the tribunal. the tribunal was directed to redetermine the issue after giving opportunity to the assessee. following the earlier orders made by this court for that assessment year, we remit this case also to the appellate tribunal for reconsidering the issue on the basis of materials if any.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2003]126TAXMAN491(Mad)
.....of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the lands held by the assessee had not been converted into stock, in, trade ?2. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in rejecting the alternate claim of the assessee regarding the computation of capital gains on transfer of lands?'the assessment years are 1982-83 and 1983-84.2. the facts as stated in the statement of case are as follows :the assessee was a private limited company engaged in textile business. from the assessment year 1982-83, it claimed that it had started business in real estate by converting part of its vacant land in to stock-in-trade to carry on the business of real estate. in order to prove the same, it was contended that a resolution to that effect was passed on 1-1-1981 and entries have been made in the books of account. it was also claimed that the proceedings of the resolution was recorded in the minutes, duly signed by the chairman, that the minutes so recorded was filed with the registrar of companies on 11-1-1983, that as per the entries made in the books of account, the property alleged to have been converted into stock-in-trade was valued at the market.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2003(1)JKJ739
.....come to the conclusion that the record maintained by the village chwokidar cannot be relied upon. this conclusion was arrived at on account of the fact that the entry was not made by the village chowkidar himself. it was in this way, reliance was placed on the school records. in doing so, the provisions of jammu and kashmir financial code volume i, and jammu and kashmir civil service regulations were taken note of. the aforementioned provisions deal with a situation where someone seeks service with the state and the question arises as to whether school certificates are to be relied upon or not. taking note of these rules, the court below, as indicated above, has come to the conclusion that the school record can be given preference. 5. i am of the opinion that either the school register or the opinion given by the doctor was of some relevance. so far as school registers are concerned, these are the documents which can be treated as public documents and reliance can be placed on them. the fact that the entries in the school register can be relied upon and have some evidential value is supported by judicial view, see air 1981 sc 361, harpal singh and anr. v. state of himachal.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2003)(85)ECC633
.....that they had added the element of duty in their cost while computing the value of their products and that nowhereless price for the products manufactured out of the nil duty paid raw material had been indicated.3. the learned advocate, further, submitted that element of duty paid by them was never taken into consideration while working out the value of their final products; that at the time of clearance of the goods, they were aware that customs duty paid by them was in excess and they had to seek refund from the department; that accordingly there was no question of taking such amount into consideration while working out the value of their final products; that for these reasons, even their balance sheet for the relevant period showed the amount of duty paid in excess as recoverable from the customs; that they had also produced the certificate of the chartered accountant confirming about non-passing of incidence of duty; that in addition they had filed a statement disclosing therein the element of premium paid by them for procurement of advance license and which was taken into consideration for working out the value of the writing instruments. he also submitted that for the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2003)(86)ECC341
.....on the inputs supplied by the appellant no. 2.2. shri b.l. narsimhan, learned advocate, submitted that m/s. hero cycles ltd. appellant no. 1 manufacture cold rolled strips (c.r.strips) for which raw material is h.r. coils in respect of which they avail modvat credit under rule 57 a of the central excise rules 1944; that they mainly purchase h.r. coils from m/s. essar steel ltd. appellant no. 2, m/s. tisco and m/s. sail; that during the disputed period, the practice in the steel industry was that the products were cleared from the factory on stock transfer basis to the various depots at a particular price; that the price at which the products were sold from the depots was also not a conclusive price; that after negotiation and based upon the market conditions, the ultimate price was arrived at and the change in price was effected in the form of debit notes/credit notes; that as per the said practice hero cycles purchased inputs from essar steel and based on the duty payment indicated in the invoice, hero cycles took modvat credit in their accounts; that after the negotiation whenever the price was reduced, the appellant no. 1 raised debit notes on the seller; that, however,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2003)(152)ELT173TriDel
.....is made subject to certain conditions; that since the import has not been made subject to any condition, section 111(o) is not applicable to the facts of the present matter; that the benefit of exemption from duty was given on the basis of the export obligation already performed and on the basis of the advance licence and the deec issued by the dgft and accordingly the exemption from duty was not subject to any further condition which was required to be fulfilled; that in any case, the exemption from duty was granted in respect of the goods imported by parties other than the appellants and there was no condition imposed on them which had to be fulfilled for the purpose of exemption; that as the appellants had not imported the goods they were not required to fulfil any condition regarding the benefit of exemption extended to the importers; that as neither the advance licence nor the deec book was cancelled and they were still valid documents based on the fulfilment of export obligation, there was no further condition to be complied with; that, therefore, section 111(o) of the act is clearly inapplicable. he also contended that the alleged acts of the appellants have not made.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2003)(152)ELT420TriDel
.....rs. 35,88,013/- with equal amount of penalty for the period 1-4-2000 to 30-8-2000, against the appellants.2. the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of exempted as well as dutiable wrist watches and wrist watch cases. the wrist watches with maximum retail price (mrp) up to rs. 500/- per piece were exempted from levy of central excise duty vide notification no. 6/2000-c.e., dated 1-3-2000 whereas the watches with mrp exceeding rs. 500/- per piece continued to attract duty @ 16% adv. the appellants were also availing ssi exemption on wrist watch cases during the financial year 2000-2001.they were availing cenvat credit facility on all the inputs meant for use in the manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted wrist watches but maintaining combined records in respect of receipt, consumption and inventory of the inputs. they were, therefore, required to pay an amount equal to 8% of the value of the exempted wrist watches of mrp up to rs. 500/- in terms of rule 57ad(2)(b), but they cleared the same without payment of duty during the period 1-4-2000 to 30-8-2000. they were served with a show cause notice dated 23-3-2001 vide which the duty demand of rs. 35,88,013/- was raised......
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT