Cst V Behl - Judgment Search Results

Combined Traders vs.commissioner of Trade & Taxes

Court: Delhi

Commissioner had been placed before her.22. Mr. Jain also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in CST v. Behl Construction (2009) 21 VST261(Del) in support of his plea that the W.P.(C) 1397/2019 Page 9 of 18 fifteen … The sacrosanct nature of the limitation periods in the above provisions has been emphasized by this Court in CST v. Behl Construction (supra) where it was observed as under: “20. The time-limits of three months, five months, six months

Aar Tee Tranport Co. Pvt. Ltd Vs. Commissioner, Department of Trade an ...

Court: Delhi

counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that he had referred to the decision of this Court in CST v. Behl Construction:21. VST 26.in the objection dated 19.09.2012 which has also not been noticed by the Objection Hearing Authority

M/S. S. Gurcharan Singh & Sons vs.commissioner Trade & Taxes & Ors.

Court: Delhi

been emphasized by this Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. M/s Behl Construction (2009) 21 VST261Del) where it was held: “8. In sub-sections (8) … Annexure P-5.7. On 23rd May 2011, another notice of default assessment of tax, interest and penalty under the CST Act, 1956 was issued by the VATO for the periods July, 2009 to March, 2010. Against this order … AT NEW DELHI * 21 + M/s. S. GURCHARAN SINGH & SONS W.P.(C) 13004/2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Varun Nischal and Mr. Arif Ahmed Khan, Advocates COMMISSIONER TRADE & TAXES & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS versus Through: Mr.

Vizien Organics vs.commissioner, Trade and Taxes and Anr.

Court: Delhi

refund claims cannot be said to be complete in case any amounts are due and owing under the CST regime. Two earlier decisions of this court, i.e. Swarn Darshan Impex (P) Ltd v Commissioner, Value Added Tax … contemplate a situation where the Commissioner does not grant a refund within the stipulated period. The decision in Behl Construction [2009]. 21 VST261(Delhi) : [2009]. 162 ECR110(Delhi) was in the context of the provisions of Section 74

M/S Mukesh Agencies vs.commissioner, Trade & Taxes & Ors.

Court: Delhi

Added Tax Officer (VATO) framed notices of default assessment of tax, interest and penalty under Section 9 of CST Act on 6/7th January, 2011 creating demand of tax and interest as well as penalty. W.P.(C) 13272/2018 Page … been emphasized by this Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. M/s Behl Construction (2009) 21 VST261(Del) where it was held: “8. In sub-sections (8) … 51615/2018 (Direction) M/S MUKESH AGENCIES ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Varun Nischal, Mr.Arif Ahmed Khan and Ms. Gauri Grover, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER, TRADE & TAXES & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Satyakam, ASC/GNCTD. Mr.P.W. Tapri, AVATO, Ward-3. Mr.Akshay Allagh, DTT,

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR2006SC1383; (2006)4CompLJ330(SC); (2006)201CTR(SC)346; [2006]282ITR273(SC); JT2006(3)SC114; 2006(2)SCALE752; (2006)3SCC1; [2006]145STC91(SC); 2006[2]STR161; [2006]152; [2006] 2 SCR 823

like electricity which is generated in projects and transmitted through sub-stations housed in building has been held in CST v. M.P. Electricity Board : [1969]2SCR939 and State of A.P. v. National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. : [2002]3SCR278 to

Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Roshan Jahangir Gandhi.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1993)117CTR(SC)47; [1993]205ITR428(SC)

exist. The question of law raised in the appeal is really sterile as it cannot arise hereafter. In CST v. S. K. Manekia [1991] 83 STC 34 (SC), dealing with an analogous situation, this court had occasion to

Commissioner of Income-tax and ors. Vs. G. Parthasarthy Naidu and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [1999]236ITR350(SC); (1998)8SCC487

notice that the ratio of the Full Bench decision has been expressly disapproved by this Court in Deputy CST v. K. Keluhutty : [1985]155ITR158(SC) . It is, therefore, obvious that the ten principles enunciated by the Full Bench

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Bom)409; [2009]310ITR421(Bom)

been inserted. It is well established in law and in fact the apex Court in the case of CST v. Indra Industries (2001) 168 CTR (SC) 50 : (2001) 248 ITR 338 and this Court in the case

M/S. Vidarbha Winding Wires Ltd. and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra, ...

Court: Mumbai Nagpur

Court may be relied upon to gather how such provisions in the Scheme need to be considered. In CST v. Industrial Coal Enterprises, (1999) 2 SCC 607, at page 616 , Hon. Apex Court observes : “11. In