1988 (4) TMI 381

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ate, for the petitioners in W.P. No. 1033 of 1986.   S.D. Bhasme, Senior Advocate (M.A. Firoz, Advocate, with him), for the petitioners in W.P. No. 844 of 1986.   V.S. Desai, Senior Advocate (A.M. Khanwilkar and A.S. Bhasme, Advocates, with him), for the respondents in both the writ petitions.   --------------------------------------------------   The judgment of the Court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uding the State of Maharashtra. Section 8 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 provides for the levy of single point sales tax on the turnover of sales of goods specified in Schedule C. Entry 91 of Part II of Schedule C specifies a rate of sales tax at 15 per cent on television sets, television cameras and television monitors. It appears that up to 19th November, 1985, the same rate of tax was applic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rs in Writ Petition No. 844 of 1986 are also manufacturers of television sets, which are imported into the State of Maharashtra. They challenge the notification dated 19th November, 1985, mentioned above, and on identical grounds. The petitioners contend that the two notifications infringe article 301 and clause (1) of article 303 of the Constitution and are not protected by clause (a) of article .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X