Madras H.C : This decision is not related to direct taxes, hence not given.

By Avijit Das / April 30, 2001

High Court Of Madras

Dr. V. Shanmughavel vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise

V.S. Sirpurkar & A. Kulasekaran, JJ.

W.P. Nos. 7273 of 1998 & 3581 of 1999

30th April, 2001

This decision is not related to direct taxes, hence not given.

[Citation : 254 ITR 717]

Post navigation

Madras H.C : The petitioners pray for a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or order in the nature of writ by declaring the provisions contained in s. 65(3) and s. 67(k) of the Finance Act, 1994 (‘the Act’) as amended in the year 1996 and r. 2(d)(viii) of Service Tax Rules as amended as unconstitutional and void

S.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the difference of Rs. 8,21,950 on the sale of the jewellery by the assessee to its 12 wholly-owned subsidiary companies was not liable to gift-tax under the provisions of the GT Act 1958.

Scroll to Top