Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1782; (1981)83BOMLR513; 1981(8)ELT613(SC); 1981(3)SCALE1365; (1981)4SCC277; [1982]1SCR621; 1981(13)LC729(SC)
V. Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against an Order dated August 3, 1978 passed by the Government of India under Section 36 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), rejecting a Revision Petition filed by the present appellant and confirming the view taken by the Appellate Collector of Excise, Bombay, that the appellant herein is not entitled to the benefit of the exemption from duty of excise conferred by a Notification No. 4/68-CE dated January 20, 1968. 2. The appellant-Company which has its factories at Sion East and Andheri East in Bombay is engaged in the manufacture of various process chemicals required for the Textile Industry. Amongst the process chemicals so manufactured by them are substances known as emulsifiers and wetting out agents. These products fall within the scope of Tariff Item 15AA of the First Schedule to the Act, which reads: Organic Surface Active Agents (other than soap); Surface Active prep...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1881; 1981(3)SCALE1437; (1981)4SCC262; [1982]1SCR607; 1981(13)LC833(SC)
D.A. Desai, J.1. In the wake of agrarian reforms initiated by the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ('Tenancy Act' for short) an amendment of far reaching and revolutionary character was introduced in 1956 so as to eliminate every intermediary between the tiller of the soil and the state. The title of the landlord to the land passes immediately to the tenant on the titllers' day and there is a completed purchase or sale thereof as between the landlord and the tenant. The title of the land which was vested originally in the landlord passes to the tenant on the tillers' day or the alternative period prescribed in that behalf. This title is defeasible only in the event of the tenant failing to appear or making a statement that he is not willing to purchase the land or committing default in payment of the price thereof as determined by the Agricultural Lands Tribunal (See Sri Ram Ram Narain Medhi v. The State of Bombay . 2. Section 32 provided that on April 1, 1957 styled the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1887; 1981(3)SCALE1338; (1981)4SCC578; [1982]1SCR563; [1981]48STC466(SC)
ORDER48. In accordance with the opinion of the majority, the appeal is allowed in part. The penalties imposed on the assessee under the impugned orders of assessment are set aside. The appeal in so far as the levy of interest is concerned is dismissed. The parties shall bear their own costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1921; (1981)22GLR167; 1981(3)SCALE1793; (1981)4SCC1; [1982]1SCR551; 1981(13)LC755(SC)
ORDERA.D. Koshal, J.1. The sole respondent in this appeal died on the 10th December, 1978. He was also arraigned as an appellant in the connected appeal (Civil Appeal No. 2132 of 1977) in which an application was made on the 20th February 1979 stating the factum and the date of the demise. A copy of that application was delivered on the date last mentioned to the clerk of learned Counsel for the appellant State, who, however, took no step to move the Court for having the legal representatives of the deceased respondent brought on the record in the present appeal till the 29th August, 1979 when an application was made for that purpose, but without being accompanied by any affidavit containing averments as to why the inordinate delay in filing the application should be condoned. An affidavit of the type just mentioned was filed in Court on 4th March, 1980.2. It is common ground between the parties that on the death of the sole respondent to the appeal the right to sue survived to his leg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1863; 1981(3)SCALE1376; (1981)4SCC391; [1982]1SCR519
A.P. Sen, J.1. This appeal by special leave, is directed against a judgment of the Kerala High Court by which the High Court dismissed the writ petition of the appellants who are manufacturers of medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol and upholding the constitutional validity of Sections 12A, 12B, 14(e) and (f) and 68A of the Abkari Act, 1077 (1 of 1077) (hereinafter called 'the Act''), introduced by the Abkari (Amendment) Act, 1967 (10 of 1967), and Rules 13 and 16 of the Kerala Rectified Spirit Rules, 1972. The main question in the appeal is as to the legislative competence of the State to enact a law relating to medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol under Entry 8, List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.2. The appellants, by virtue of a licence in Form 25 granted under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and a licence in Form L1 granted under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Centra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1957; 1981(3)SCALE1803; (1981)4SCC283; [1982]1SCR554; 1981(13)LC772(SC)
A. Varadarajan, J.1. This appeal by special leave is by the respondents in Civil Rule 420 of 1966 against the Judgment and Order dated 30th July, 1968 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland, allowing the Writ petition with no order as to costs. That writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order of requisition issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhmipur-Dibrugarh, the second appellant in this appeal and the first respondent in the writ petition-under Memo No. LA/27511-15/R dated 25.10.1966. The Memo was issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 29(i) of the Defence of India Act, 1962 (51 of 1962) read with the Notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs No. S.O. 1888 dated 10th June, 1965 in respect of the properties described in the schedule attached thereto viz. Sookerating Tea Estate and Budla Beta Tea Estates, situate in Dum-Duma, Mauza Lakhmipur District on the ground that the la...
Tag this Judgment!