M. N. VENKATACHALIAH, S. MOHAN
State Of Bihar – Appellant
Versus
Universal Hydrocarbons Company LTD. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
MOHAN, J.:—Leave granted.
2. Respondent No.1 is a private company. The respondent No. 2 is one of the directors-cum-shareholders.
3. The respondent purchases raw petroleum product. This product undergoes a process of manufacture in the factory. The ultimate commodity is Calcined Petroleum Coke (hereinafter referred to C.P.C.).
4. The respondent was subject to Sales Tax under Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as Finance Act) on the sale of C.P.C. as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The respondent stated that he missed to claim the adjustment of sales tax paid on the purchase of raw materials in the returns filed for the months of July and August,1990. The admitted tax due thereon was paid. In terms of Section 15(b) of the Act the respondent was entitled to a refund of sales tax paid under Finance Act. While filing the return for the month of September, 1990, the respondent did not pay the admitted tax of Rs.1,96,072/- but claimed refund of Rs.5,22,728/- which would be adjusted towards the admitted tax of 1,96,072/- and the balance of Rs.3,26,656/- was to be refunded on account of Bihar Sales Tax paid on the direct raw
relied on : alt Rikhaji Furtamal v. State of A.P.
Indian Carbon Ltd. v. Superintendent of Taxes. Gauhati
referred to and distinguished : State of T.N. v. Pyare Lal Malhotra
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.