Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        -

        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>Court upholds tax authority's power on purchase tax, limits contravention to raw material purchases only</h1> The court held that the Assistant Commissioner had the authority to increase the quantum of purchases and the rate of purchase tax due to retroactive ... - Issues Involved:1. Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner to enhance the quantum of purchases.2. Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner to enhance the rate of purchase tax.3. Application of the pro rata method for determining the contravention of form 15 certificates.4. Entitlement to full set-off of tax.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner to Enhance the Quantum of Purchases:The applicants contended that the Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to enhance the quantum of purchases from Rs. 3,52,597 to Rs. 7,69,246 while deciding the appeal. The court held that under the old sub-section (6) of section 55 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, the appellate authority could only pass orders related to the actual subject matter of the appeal. The Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to decide the method of working out the percentage of contravention of certificates in form 15, and his decision to include machinery purchases in the calculation was within his jurisdiction, even though it was incorrect. Thus, the Assistant Commissioner had the power to enhance the quantum of purchases, but he was wrong in law in enhancing it from Rs. 3,52,597 to Rs. 7,69,246.2. Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner to Enhance the Rate of Purchase Tax:The applicants argued that the Assistant Commissioner did not have the jurisdiction to enhance the rate of purchase tax from 3 percent to 5 percent. The court held that the question of liability to pay purchase tax under section 14 necessarily involves the rate at which such tax is to be paid. The Assistant Commissioner had the jurisdiction to enhance the rate of purchase tax due to the retrospective operation of sub-section (2A) of section 14 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, as substituted by the Bombay Sales Tax (Amendment and Validating Provisions) Act, 1973. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner possessed the jurisdiction to enhance the rate of purchase tax from 3 percent to 5 percent.3. Application of the Pro Rata Method for Determining the Contravention of Form 15 Certificates:The applicants contended that the pro rata method adopted by the department was incorrect and that branch transfers should be excluded from consideration. The court referred to the judgment in Berar Oil Industries' case [1975] 36 STC 473, which upheld the pro rata method where separate accounts were not kept by the assessee. The court agreed with the applicants that the Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal erred in including machinery purchases in the calculation. The contravention of certificates in form 15 should be worked out by applying the pro rata method to the total purchases of raw materials only, without adding machinery purchases. Thus, the contravention was in respect of goods valued at Rs. 3,52,597, not Rs. 7,69,246.4. Entitlement to Full Set-Off of Tax:The applicants argued that they were entitled to a full set-off of Rs. 1,26,634. The court did not provide an elaborate answer to this question due to the statement made by the department's counsel that the Commissioner of Sales Tax would give the applicants relief by way of administrative measures under the Commissioner's circular dated 21st June, 1978. Therefore, the court did not answer this question in detail.Conclusion:The court concluded that the Assistant Commissioner had the power to enhance the quantum of purchases and the rate of purchase tax due to the retrospective operation of the amended provisions. However, the Assistant Commissioner erred in including machinery purchases in the calculation of contravention of form 15 certificates. The contravention should be limited to purchases of raw materials valued at Rs. 3,52,597. The applicants were entitled to administrative relief as per the Commissioner's circular. There was no order as to costs, and the applicants were entitled to a refund of the fee paid.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found