Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Port Trust sales of unclaimed items deemed non-taxable under Madras GST Act, court rules</h1> <h3>State of Madras Versus Trustees of the Port of Madras</h3> State of Madras Versus Trustees of the Port of Madras - [1974] 34 STC 135 (Mad) Issues:1. Taxability of sales of unclaimed and unserviceable articles by the Madras Port Trust under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959.Analysis:The judgment of the Madras High Court, delivered by Justice Ramanujam, pertains to the taxability of sales of unclaimed and unserviceable articles by the Madras Port Trust under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The case involved sales conducted by the Port Trust through auctioneers, M/s. Murray and Company, for the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66. The assessing authority considered these sales taxable, leading to a dispute with the assessee. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal also deliberated on the matter before it reached the High Court.The crux of the issue revolved around whether the sales of unclaimed and unserviceable articles by the Port Trust could be deemed as part of a business activity, thereby making them taxable under the Act. The State contended that post the amendment to the definition of 'business' in 1964, all commercial transactions, irrespective of profit motive, fell under the purview of the Act. Citing the decision in State of Tamil Nadu v. Burmah Shell Co. Ltd., the revenue argued that the sales by the Port Trust should be taxed as they could be considered commercial transactions.However, the High Court analyzed the statutory framework governing the Port Trust's functions under the Madras Port Trust Act, 1905. It highlighted that the Port Trust's sales were conducted to recover dues by exercising its statutory lien over goods, and the sale proceeds did not accrue to the Port Trust as property. Drawing parallels with precedents like Director of Supplies and Disposals v. Board of Revenue, West Bengal, the court emphasized that a mere disposal of goods for recovery did not constitute a commercial venture or business activity.Further, the court referenced cases like Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam v. State of Madras and Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Commercial Tax Officer to underscore that for sales to be taxable, they must align with trading, commercial, or manufacturing activities. The judgment clarified that the Port Trust's sales were incidental to its statutory duties and not indicative of a business venture, thereby exempting them from taxation.Moreover, attempts by the revenue to categorize the Port Trust as a dealer under various provisions of the Act, including as a department of the Central Government or a local authority, were refuted by the court. Drawing from past decisions like Trustees of the Port of Madras v. State of Madras, the court reiterated that the Port Trust's actions were in fulfillment of statutory obligations, not indicative of a dealer engaged in business activities.In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the tax cases, ruling in favor of the Madras Port Trust and emphasizing that the sales of unclaimed and unserviceable goods were not subject to taxation under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found