Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
5 judgments · newest first · showing 1–5
The appellants, coffee growers, filed writ petitions seeking to restrain the Coffee Board from using the Pool Fund, created under Section 30 of the Coffee Act, 1942, to pay the purchase tax imposed by the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The High Court held that the growers were not liable to pay the …
The Coffee Board, which employs staff for storing, curing and marketing coffee, made an ex‑gratia payment to those employees equal to the minimum bonus payable under the Payment of Bonus Act for the years 1964‑65 to 1968‑69. The payment was made from the surplus "Pool Fund" created under Section 32 …
The appellants, exporters of coffee, participated in a Coffee Board auction on 18 May 1977. Clause 10 of the auction terms provided that any increase or reduction in taxes or duties occurring within 45 days from the date of auction, inclusive of that day, would be shared equally between the Board …
The Coffee Board challenged the levy of purchase tax on coffee it received from growers under the compulsory delivery provision of the Coffee Act, 1942, arguing that the transaction was a compulsory acquisition and not a sale. The Karnataka High Court held that an element of consensuality existed, …
The Coffee Board conducts export auctions of coffee and requires registered exporters to furnish security deposits and, under a 1977 circular, contingency deposits or bank guarantees equal to the sales tax that would have been payable despite the exemption granted by Section 5(3) of the Central …
