Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1987(11)ECC118; 1987(10)LC688(MP); 1987(30)ELT81(MP)
..... obvious that unless this plea is upheld, the petition must be allowed.6. the above facts are not in controversy and the only question is whether on these facts, section 47 of the finance act, 1982 is available to the respondents. in our opinion, a plain reading of this provision is sufficient to indicate that this contention is untenable. as indicated earlier, the ..... amended and the consequence of the amendment was also provided. the respondents' contention is that by virtue of this amendment made in section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the central excises and salt act, 1944, by section 47 of the finance act, 1982, the effect of the earlier decision is superseded and the respondents are entitled to reopen the matter for making a fresh assessment .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1960]11STC316(MP)
..... successor of the sales tax commissioner who held that the transactions were not sales subsequently called upon the assessee to show cause under section 22(5) of the c.p. and berar sales tax act why the assessment should not be set aside and a fresh assessment made according to law. he was of the opinion that because ..... sales tax officer the assessee made a reference to the sales tax commissioner under section 19(b) of the c.p. and berar sales tax act for determining the question whether certain transactions during the above period were sales or not. those transactions related to financing the purchasers and sellers and taking commission and interest from them, in respect ..... deemed to have dominion over the goods by virtue of his financing the purchasers and sellers and accordingly agreed with the previous sales tax commissioner and quashed the order of his successor.5. 'dealer' is defined in section 2(c) of the c.p. and berar sales tax act as 'any person who, whether as principal or agent, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [2005]273ITR375(MP)
..... december 1, 1973. in this view of the matter and under these circumstances, one of the essential conditions necessary for claiming development rebate provided in section 16(c) of the finance act is not satisfied and hence the assessee was not eligible/qualified to claim the benefit of development rebate by virtue of the notification dated may 28 ..... , (annexure a), disallowed the claim of development rebate of the assessee, inter alia, on the ground that the same does not satisfy the requirement of section 16(c) of the finance act, 1974. the assessee felt aggrieved of this order filed an appeal to the commissioner of income-tax (appeals). by order dated may 24, 1988 (annexure ..... we find no merit in this submission.15. in the first place, even this submission has to be tested in the context of requirement of section 16(c) of the finance act. secondly, whether the promoter had entered into an agreement or whether the company had entered into such agreement, it is of no significance unless the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2004)186CTR(MP)364; [2004]266ITR364(MP); 2002(4)MPLJ495
..... agent of the wholesaler ceases to be a seller for the present purposes. the second important aspect is that by the finance act, 1990, an explanation was inserted in sub-section (1)(a) of section 44ac of the act whereby 'purchase price' was defined to mean any amount (by whatever name called) paid or payable by the buyer to ..... come into force w.e.f. the asst. yr. 1991-92 and, therefore, will be applicable to the collections under section 206c made during the financial year 1990-91. 4. the finance act, 1990 has further amended section 44ac so as to include a 'cooperative society' also within the meaning of the term 'seller' as defined therein. the ..... . as a result of different systems prevailing in different states, the term 'purchase price1, used in section 44ac of the it act was being understood in different ways. in order to clarify this point, the finance act, 1990 has amended the said section to provide that the purchase price would mean any amount (by whatever name called) paid or payable .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP207; 2009(3)MPHT304; 2009[15]STR3; [2009]22STT105; (2009)22VST170(MP); 2009(5)AIRKarR498
..... may not have otherwise amounted to manufacture are also brought within the ambit and purview of the said definition.20. in this context it is worth-noting section 65 (76b) of the finance act uses the words 'but it does not include'. thus, it is a definition which has the inclusive as well as exclusive facet. by virtue of ..... which is independent of the process of manufacture and cannot be said to be integral part of process of manufacture as excluded in section 65(76)(b) inserted by the finance act, 2005 read with section 2(f) of the central excise act. the apex court in collector, central excise, bombay v. s.d. fine chemicals pvt. ltd. : 1995(77)elt49(sc ..... (76b) while defining refers to the definition of 'manufacture' as contained in section 2(f) of the central excise act. thus, in a way it is referral legislation. in this context, we may refer with profit to the decision rendered in bajya v. smt. gopikabai : [1978]3scr561 wherein it has been held as under:27. broadly speaking, legislation by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)215CTR(MP)333
..... the supreme court in allied motor's case and hence, this court cannot accept this submission.12. in our considered view, since the 2nd proviso to section 43b was omitted by finance act, 2003 w.e.f. 1st april, 2004 and hence, it is prospective in operation. when the legislature has specifically brought the omission in force w.e ..... in the case of allied motors (p) ltd. (supra) has held that proviso appended to section 43b has retrospective operation from the date of enactment of section 43b ibid though inserted in the section at a later date then its omission by finance act, 2003, too will have retrospective effect, i.e., as if it was not a part of ..... learned counsel for the appellant (assessee) in substance urged only one contention. according to him, since the second proviso to section 43b has been omitted from the statute book (i.e. from section 43b) though w.e.f. 1st april, 2004 by finance act, 2003, but the said omission will have its retrospective effect from the date of insertion of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)214CTR(MP)344; [2009]317ITR386(MP)
..... ) was inserted with effect from october 1, 1967, by the taxation laws (amendment) act, 1967 and explanation 2 inserted therein by the finance act, 1983, retrospectively, with effect from april 1, 1976, while sub-section (2b) was inserted with effect from april 1, 1970 by the finance act, 1970. as earlier stated, these cases relate to the period prior to april 1, 1976, from which date ..... explanation 2 to sub-section (2a) was inserted retrospectively. we have, therefore, to construe sub .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP195
..... and it was illegal for the state authorities to continue it. the assessments made in 1951 by the state authorities were therefore contrary to the provisions of section 13 of the finance act of 1950 and were illegal.16. it was to validate the illegal orders passed by the state authorities that the madhya bharat taxes on income (validation ..... valid and shall not be called in question on the ground only that such proceedings were not taken by the authority referred to in the proviso to section 13 of the finance act of 1950.section 4 of that act provided for completion of the pending proceedings by the state authorities. in short, the effect of these two validating ..... given in the statement of objects and reasons annexed to the bill is that the madhya bharat government had overlooked the provisions in section 13 of the finance act, 1950 and had continued to recover the arrears with the aid of their own officers. thus the facts existing in 1954 were that assessments had been completed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1981]132ITR884(MP)
..... department brought to our notice the provisions of the finance act, 1964, which prescribe the rate of tax. there is, however, no provision in the finance act, 1964, providing for the levying of tax on the dividend distributed by a company. under the provisions of section 43 of the state financial corporations act, 1951, for the purpose of income-tax, the ..... for the assessment year 1964-65, the tribunal observed that the ito was justified, in the circumstances of the case, in exercising his powers under section 154 of the i.t. act, 1961. 3. the assessee had also invested a sum of rs.11,91,000 in the madhya pradesh state development loans. these bonds were ..... ' 2. the material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows : the assessee is a corporation established by the state govt. under section 3 of the state financial corporations act, 1951. the assessment years in question are 1964-65, 1965-66, 1969-70 and 1970-71. the assessee had distributed dividend amounting to rs. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (1979)8CTR(MP)11; [1980]121ITR373(MP); 1979MPLJ416
..... i, seventh edn., p. 1294], with great respect, we are unable to accept the view taken by the orissa high court.10. the finance act, 1968, which by section 19 'substituted' a new clause (iii) in section 271(1) in place of the then existing clause was assented to by the president on 11th may, 1968, but was brought into force ..... would have been avoided if the income as returned by such person had been accepted as the correct income.' 5. by section 19 of the finance act, 1968, which came into force on 1st april, 1968, for clause (iii) in section 271(1), the following clause was substituted :'(iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c), in addition to any ..... passed. the same view has been taken by some other high courts: [see cgt v. muthukumaraswamy mudaliar : [1975]98itr540(mad) and addl. cit v. khaja khutabuddinkhan : [1978]114itr905(ap) ].12. on the facts stated by the tribunal, it is clear that the assessee concealed particulars of its income from truck business when it filed the return on .....
Tag this Judgment!