NRI Legal Services +919876616815 – Top latest Five NRI Legal Services Urban news
in his dissenting judgment. Our law of evidence which is a complete Code does not permit the importation nrilegalservices.me of any principle of English Common Law relating (1) 169 English Reports page 909. 114 (Illustration f) of the Evidence: Act. for generating and distributing electricity within thetowns of Allahabad and Lucknow. Such a notice could be served only within three years of the end of the financial year. Firstly, by virtue of regulation 5(1) of the 1992 Regulations, the person liable to pay the duty in the case of an importation of excise goods from another member state was the importer of the excise goods.
All the workmen of the undertakings at Allahabad and Lucknow were taken over in the employment of the Board with effect from September 17, 1964, without any break in the continuity of employment. The 1992 Regulations provided that a significantly wider number of categories of person www.nrilegalservices.me were liable for import duty than are liable under the 2001 Regulations. In our view the maxim of the English Common Law can have no application here.
30 of the Act had been served at any time in respect of the assessment covered by the impugned orders. More relevantly for this case, however, was the provision in regulation 5(3) of the 1992 Regulations that among the categories of person who would be jointly and severally liable with the importer of the goods for the duty was any consignee of the excise goods. reason for this Court to take a different view. At a later hearing, on 29 October 2008, confiscation orders were made in respect of each of the defendants as follows: Patrick Mackle – £518,387.
The 2001 Regulations provide a sharp and http://nrilegalservices.me (for the purposes of this case) pertinent contrast with their predecessor, the Excise Goods (Holding, Movement, Warehousing and REDS) Regulations 1992 http://nrilegalservices.me (SI 1992/3135). Electric Supply Company Ltd. 286 The case for the plaintiffs is that this temple originated http://nrilegalservices.me as a public temple. Mathuranathji brought that idol alongwith him when he came to Nadiad and worshiped the same as his private deity. nrilegalservices On 13 December 2007 Deeny J sentenced Patrick Mackle to three years‘ imprisonment, suspended for a period of five years.
[838 A-B] (ii) The High Court rightly held that an office copy of a premium debit note maintained by an insurance company in the usual course of its 823 business and attached to the office copy of the insurance policy was admissible in evidence under s. The Company accordingly 510 ceased to carry on the business of generation and distribution of electricity in the areas covered by the original licences. 6 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, the State Electricity Board, U.
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12(1) in each of the said licenses and in exercise of the power under s. The confiscation orders were made with the consent of each of the Mackle brothers. Apart from other points which were raised the main objection taken was that no notice under s. -hereinafter called the Company‘-held two licences issued in 1914 by the Government of U. -hereinafter referred to as „the Board took over the undertaking of the Company at Allahabad and Lucknow from the mid-night of September 16, 1964.
No objection could be allowed to. The periods of the licenses expired in 1964. This part of her case was given up at a later stage, and she put forward a new case to the effect that the idol Gokulnathji was brought by the ancestors of Mathuranathii to: Nadiad and it is they who started worshiping that idol at Nadiad. For a discussion of the constricting of the classes of individual liable for duty on tobacco products which the 2001 Regulations introduced, see R v Khan [2009] EWCA Crim 588, para 2.
In the absence of service of the aforesaid notice within the prescribed period the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to make any assessment nor could such an assessment be made after the expiry of a period of three years from the end of each financial year. Jude Mackle and Benedict Mackle were sentenced to two and a half years‘ imprisonment. According to them it was rounded long before Mathuranathji was born; the idol of Gokulnathji was originally worshiped at Nagarwad and later on the suit temple was built and that idol installed therein.
From this it is clear that the appellant has no consistent case as to the origin of the worship of Gokulnathji at Nadiad. Jethmalani however relied on certain observations of Coleridge, 1. The new plea put forward by her was evidently intended to meet the evidence adduced to show that the idol of Gokulnathji was being worshiped at Nadiad even before Mathuranathji was born. The aggregate sum produced by these three amounts was equal to the amount of duty and Value Added Tax which had been evaded.
00; Jude Mackle and Benedict Mackle – £259,193. Again that sentence was suspended for five years. In order to show that the idol of Gokulnathji was being worshiped in Nadiad even in the 18th century, oral evidence of local repute has been adduced by the plaintiffs. We have earlier seen that the case of the I st defendant on this point was that the idol of Gokulnathji was the private property of Mathuranathiji. Again, fire fighting equipment and appliances such as fire extinguishers used in homes or in offices or in cinema halls or as accessories to motor cars 495 would clearly be included in the industry at item 8-B(14).
