Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 66 (1.90 seconds)
Documents citing The District Controller Of Stores, ... vs The Assistant Commercial Taxation ... on 9 December, 1975

Deputy Commissioner (Ct), Coimbatore ... vs Anamallais Bus Transport (P.) Limited on 4 April, 1991

That apart, we find that this Court has been consistently taking the view following the ratio of the Apex Court in [1973] 31 STC 426 (State of Tamil Nadu v. Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Co. of India Ltd.), [1982] 49 STC 17 (State of Tamil Nadu v. Binny Ltd.) and [1976] 37 STC 423 (District Controller of Stores, Northern Railway v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer) that the transactions of the nature carried on by the respondent/assessee are exigible to sales tax under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act on the reasoning that such assessees are dealers and the transactions in question are in the course of its business or incidental or ancillary to its business.
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 3 - A S Anand - Full Document

State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Andhra Pradesh Housing Board on 17 February, 1988

We find that in two earlier decisions of the Supreme Court, the question relating to the sale of scrap material had been dealt with and neither of those decisions had been referred to by the Supreme Court in the District Controller of Stores v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer [1976] 37 STC 423; nor were earlier cases distinguished or set aside, by the decision of the Supreme Court.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 13 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Divisional Superintendent ... vs Commissioner, Trade Tax on 26 April, 2006

11. Thus, the case of the applicant is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court in the case of The District Controller of Stores, Northern Railway, Jodhpur v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer (supra), which is in the case of the applicant itself. After the decision of the Apex Court in the case of the applicant itself, there is no scope of any further argument.
Allahabad High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - R Kumar - Full Document

State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport ... on 17 August, 1988

16. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes relying upon the decision in District Controller of Stores v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer vehemently contends that the activities carried on by the railways in the above case are similar to that of the corporation in question and inasmuch as the Supreme Court held that the railways are liable to pay tax in respect of the scrap and unserviceable material sold by the railways the same ratio must be applied to the case on hand and it must be held that the corporation is liable to pay tax in respect of the scrap sold by it. We are afraid, we cannot agree with the contention advanced by the learned Government Pleader. The decision relied upon by him would not be of any assistance to him.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 23 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Controller Of Stores, Central Railway vs Commissioner Of Sales Tax, Maharashtra ... on 7 February, 1995

6. We have carefully perused the decision of the Supreme Court in District Controller of Stores, Northern Railway v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer [1976] 37 STC 423 and also the definition of "business" in clause (5A) of section 2 of the Act as it stood at the material time. We find that the above decision of the Supreme Court clearly applies to the facts of the present case. The assessee in the case before the Supreme Court and the present case is the same, that is, the Indian Railways. The activity of transportation undertaken by the Indian Railways has been held in that case to be "commerce" within the meaning of the definition of "business" and the sale of unserviceable materials and scrap-iron, etc., as transaction in connection with or ancillary to such commerce. We fail to understand how, in the face of this finding of the Supreme Court, the assessee can contend that it is not a "dealer" under the Bombay Sales Tax Act.
Bombay High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 10 - D K Trivedi - Full Document

Board Of Trustees Of The Visakhapatnam ... vs Commercial Tax Officer And Anr. on 17 June, 1977

20. It is not unlikely that Mathew, J., when he spoke for the Supreme Court in District Controller of Stores v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer [1976] 37 S.T.C. 423 (S.C.), had this interpretation of the word "commerce" in Monodu v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co. 56 L. Ed. 327 in view, while observing that the railway, since it is concerned in the activity of transportation, is engaged in commerce. It is true that the Port Trust authorities are in some way connected with transportation of goods or passengers, unlike railways. The facilities for transport of goods and services are provided by the Board of Trustees ; but the Board of Trustees itself is not concerned in the transportation of goods. Whatever services it provides are for the purpose of facilitating the easier flow of goods and passengers. It does not carry any goods or passengers itself. That basic distinction should be borne in mind when dealing with the Board of Trustees as distinguished from railways.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 28 - Cited by 13 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next