Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 219 (2.43 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Orissa & Other vs The Tltaghur Paper Mills Company Ltd.& ... on 1 March, 1985

Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Limited vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Anr. on 29 February, 1988

4. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader, Sri A. Venkataramana, that the judgment of the Supreme Court is not applicable to the facts of the present case, that the agreement is a "long-term selling arrangement" for 20 years that there is a sale every year of bamboo of a quantity of one lakh tonnes and that there is a "sale of goods" attracting the provisions of the sales tax law. It is pointed out that each year the bamboo coupes are not constant but go on changing as identified by the Forest Department and that there is no such annual earmarking of the bamboo coupes in the Orissa case decided by the Supreme Court.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 23 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Peekay Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) on 7 April, 2006

The Tribunal also observed that "the learned State representative attempted to distinguish between a 'Stage' and a 'point' but neither State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. (1985) 60 STC 213 nor Rajasthan Commercial Corporation v. Sales Tax Commissioner (1986) 63 STC 314 did so. In those judgments these two words were used synonymously. Therefore, the Tribunal had come to the finding that "having regard to the language of Section 15(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act and the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court discussed above, we are of the view that the State Legislature has no power to impose both sales tax and purchase tax on the same declared goods at the same stage although the sale and the purchase may constitute one composite transaction.
Kerala High Court Cites 41 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Tonira Pharma Ltd. vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 1 November, 2006

17. The decision of the Apex Court in State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills 1985 (Supp) SCC 280 cited by the learned DR is not relevant for the reasons that the notifications considered in the Titaghur case were not those having a built-in expiry date and further the notifications were not a self-contained code levying taxes but only specify the rate stipulated by the main charging section, viz. Section 5 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act. Although notification 104/2000-Cus. has been issued under the provisions of Section 9A(1), it is the notification which both levies and imposes anti-dumping duty and is thus a self-contained code and since it has a built-in expiry date with no saving clause and expires by efflux of time specified therein, pending proceedings seeking to demand duty based on such notification, would automatically come to an end. Section 159A of the Customs Act which is pari materia to Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 will not apply so as to save the levy of anti-dumping duty under the notification for the reason that Section 6 would not apply Further, this section would not apply to anti-dumping duty levied by a notification issued under the Customs Tariff Act as it applies only to any rule, regulation, notification or order made or issued under the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, die demand of anti-dumping duty of Rs. 1,80,80,457/- on ascorbic acid imported up to 11-5-2001 and Rs. 60,03,000/- on 3,4,5 TMBA imported between February and September, 2000 (total Rs. 2,40,83,457/-) is required to be set aside.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 67 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

West Bengal State Electricity ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 12 February, 2024

In order to understand what the expression "deemed distribution licensee", as has been used in the third proviso to Section 14 of the Electricity Act means, reliance can only be placed on the definition of these words and expressions in the Electricity Act, and not on dictionaries, for it is well settled that the Page 58 of 387 dictionary meaning of a word cannot be looked at where that word has been statutorily defined or judicially interpreted (State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd., 1985 Supp SCC 280). Where the definition has been given in the statute itself, it is neither proper nor desirable to look to dictionaries to find out the meaning of the expression. The definition given in the statute is the determinative factor.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 434 - Cited by 0 - R Ranganathan - Full Document

M/S.Tamil Nadu Magnesite Limited vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 February, 2007

13. From the facts above stated, what is assailed in these writ petitions is an assessment order passed by the statutory authority, who is having competence to pass an assessment order. Hence, all the objections can very well be raised before the appellate authority by filing an appeal. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that filing of an appeal under the statutory provision is an exercise in futility as the present case is squarely covered by the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS VS. TITAGHUR PAPER MILLS CO.LTD.
Madras High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - K R Pandian - Full Document

M/S Triveni Engineering And Industries ... vs State Of U.P.Through It ... on 17 March, 2011

The attempt made on the part of State legislation to impose tax "administrative charges" on the transfer of molasses from Sugar unit to the Distillery unit owned by the same person is totally constitution on the principle of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Titagarh Paper Mills Co. ltd 1985(Supp) SCC 280 wherein the Apex Court observed that any attempt on the part of State to impose by legislation sales tax or purchase tax in respect of what would not be sale or sale of goods under Sale of Goods Act, is unconstitutional. The relevant paragraph reads as under:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 67 - Cited by 4 - R Sharma - Full Document

A.C.T.O. Ward-Iv vs L. Rs. Of Deceased Chhogalal Akodia on 24 February, 1992

In the cases referred above, the different High Courts as well as the Apex Court has discussed in different context as to what process amounts to manufacture. The cutting of crude mica has not been considered in any of these cases. But these opinions, are, of course, relevant and would be amongst the various factors to be taken into account in deciding the question. The test is whether in the eyes of those dealing in the commodity is regarded as distinct in character and identity from the original commodity.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 10 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next