Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.79 seconds)
State Of Madras Represented By The ... vs The Trustees Of Port Of Madras, ... on 24 July, 1973 cites

State Of Tamil Nadu vs M/S Burmah Shell Oil Storage & ... on 10 October, 1972

9. We are, therefore, of the view that the decision in State of Tamil Nadu v. Burmah Shell Co. Limited which is strongly relied on by the Revenue cannot be of any help for the reason that the sales of unclaimed and unserviceable goods effected by the Port Trust are not incidental or ancillary to any business, but are only in the course of its performance of the statutory duties.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 100 - P J Reddy - Full Document

Director Of Supplies & Disposals, ... vs Member, Board Of Revenue, West ... on 24 April, 1967

In Director of Supplies and Disposals v. Board of Revenue, West Bengal, Calcutta (1967) 20 S.T.G. 398 : (1967) 2 I.T.J. 847 : (1968) 1 S.G.J. 792 : (1967) 3 S.G.R. 778 : A.I.R. 1967 S.G. 1826, their Lordships of the Supreme Court considered a somewhat similar question. In that case the Director of Supplies and Disposals was taxed on his sales of some surplus materials. It was found that the function of the Directorate of Supplies and Disposals was to dispose of the surplus goods and to purchase goods on behalf of the Government of India and that a considerable portion of the surplus materials left in India at the conclusion of the last war by the American Government which were no longer useful or have become obsolete were sold to the public in a series of transactions. The question there was whether the Director of Supplies and Disposals carried on the business of selling the goods and was a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The Court held that though the expression "business" is a word of wide and indefinite import, there must be some real, systematic or organised course of activity or conduct with a set purpose of making profit, that the Director was merely disposing of the surplus material by way of realisation of its value and that, therefore, the transactions were not taxable as sales effected by a dealer.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 44 - J C Shah - Full Document

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport ... vs Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad, And ... on 14 March, 1961

In Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderabad-III (1971) 27 S.T.G. 42, the Andhra Pradesh High Court had held that the sales of scrapped vehicles with tyres, old containers and other unserviceable materials effected periodically by the Andhra Pradesh Road, Transport Corporation constituted under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 were not taxable on the ground that the Corporation was not a dealer carrying on business in those materials and that the Corporation is primarily constituted for operating an efficient road-transport service and it could not be held to be carrying on business of selling discarded materials which have come into its possession in the course of its activities.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 47 - Cited by 44 - Full Document

Trustees Of The Port Of Madras vs The State Of Madras on 27 November, 1959

12. As a matter of fact in Trustees of the Port of Madras v. State of Madras (1960) 11 S.T.G. 224 : I.L.R. (1960) Mad. 529 : (1960) 2 M.L.J. 86 : (1960) Mad. L.W. 198, the question arose as to whether the Madras Port Trust could be taxed under the Act on their supply of water to the ships which touched the Port of Madras. A Division Bench of this Court held that the Port Trust in supplying water to the ships and collecting a fee therefor was only discharging a duty imposed upon it by the Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 and was not doing any business so as to make it a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(g) of the Act. We therefore hold that the Port Trust was not a dealer when it effected the sales in question and, therefore, the sales are not taxable under the Act.
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 13 - Full Document
1