Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.61 seconds)
The Commissioner, Sales Tax vs S/S Ram Narain Pratap Narain Purfumers on 13 March, 2007 cites

Commissioner, Sales Tax vs Pali Ram Laxmi Narain on 7 January, 1980

6. The question for determination is as to whether the Nagar Motha Oil, Peppermint Oil and Raunsa Oil being essential oils are covered under the entry "Oil of all kinds". It has been argued by the learned Counsel for the assessee that Nagar Motha Oil, Peppermint Oil and Raunsa Oil are extracted from roots, herbs and plants and.are essential oils, hence the same is taxable as Oil of all kinds. Learned Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that in the assessee's case in second appeal No. 691 of 1983, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Ram Narain Pratap Narain (assessee) for the assessment year 1975-76 decided on 14.04.1983, the Kanpur Bench of the Tribunal, after relying on the case of R. Oil and Chemicals, Bareilly v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in 1983 STI (Alld. H.C.) page 295 has held that Raunsa and Menthol Oils are manufactured from Rausa and Mentha grass and they are covered under the general entry "Oil of all kinds". There is nothing on record to show that the said decision of the Tribunal is either set aside or the operation of the order is stayed
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - R M Sahai - Full Document

M/S. Mohta Trading Co., Varanasi vs Commissioner Of Sales Tax, U.P. ... on 5 January, 1976

2. For the assessment year 1976-77 under Section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the limitation for making the assessment was four years from the end of the assessment order, which expired on 31.03.1981, therefore, the assessment should be made by 31st March, 1981. The notice under Section 21 of the Act was admittedly not issued within four years i.e. by 31st March, 1981, but was issued on 6th March, 1982 by U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1983 (U.P. Act No. 16 of 1983), proviso to Section 21(2) of the Act was amended and the limitation to make assessment has been extended upto 31st December, 1982. Relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of M/S Jaiswal Colour Trading Company v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in 1987 UPTC 504, Tribunal held that the proceeding under Section 21 of the Act was barred by limitation inasmuch as the amendment was not applicable because the entire proceeding was closed when the amendment was introduced.
Allahabad High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Addl. Commissioner (Legal) & Anr. vs M/S. Jyoti Traders And Anr. on 20 September, 1998

3. Learned Counsel for both the parties agreed that the question No. 2 is squarely covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Additional Commissioner (Legal) and Anr. v. Jyoti Traders and Anr. reported in 1999 UPTC 45 in which it has been held that the amendment made, extending the period of limitation applies to a case where no proceeding was pending.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 18 - D P Wadhwa - Full Document

Collector Of Central Excise, Shillong vs Wood Craft Products Ltd on 20 March, 1995

In the case of Collector of Central Excise, Shillong v. Wood Craft Products Ltd. , Apex Court held that the residuary can be resorted to only when even a liberal construction of the specific headings is not capable of covering the goods in question. Thus, in the absence of any specific entry relating to the aforesaid three items, being essential oils has been rightly covered under the generic entry "Oil of all kinds"
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 128 - J S Verma - Full Document

Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Hindustan Traders on 2 August, 2004

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to hold that the proceedings under Section 21 are barred by limitation in view of the decision of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CST v. Bhagwan Finance Corporation 1988-27 STL (34) and decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Additional Commissioner v. Jyoti Traders 1999 UPTC 45?.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1