9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (10) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... argument should have been closed. Thus the judgment under appeal is erroneous and must be reversed. - C.A. No. 3243-3249 of 1991, W.A. No. 878-883, 1496 of 1988 - - - Dated:- 23-10-1997 - BHARUCHA S.P. AND SEN S.C. JJ. V. Krishnamurthy, Advocate, for the appellants. Prag Tripathi and P.P. Tripathi, Advocate, for the respondents. -------------------------------------------------- On November 12, 1965, the appellants issued a notification under the provisions of section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, directing that the rate of sales tax on the sale of white printing paper to newspaper concerns in the course of inter-State trade or commerce should be calculated at the rate of 2 per cent. The exemption notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... governed the exercise of the power to grant the exemption. The division Bench took notice of a plea that was raised by the respondents in additional grounds taken before it, namely, that the withdrawal notification did not disclose that the appellants had been satisfied that it was necessary in the public interest to withdraw the exemption notification, and that there was no material on which the appellants were or could be said to have been so satisfied. The High Court noted the proceedings of the Board of Revenue which were produced before it by the appellants and which gave the reason that, in view of the changes in the rates of sales tax payable, the appellants found that there was no need to continue the lower rates of tax admissible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Officers of the appellants and, indeed, authors and publishers were oblivious to its existence. But that is not to say that the bare bones of the requirements of law were not satisfied. 6.. It was contended before us on behalf of the respondents that the special importance of newsprint has not been considered by the appellants and that it was in that light that the appellants should have considered whether or not it was in the public interest to withdraw the exemption notification. It is necessary, we think, to see how this second argument has progressed from stage to stage. It was only in the appeal court that the respondents additional grounds took the plea that the withdrawal notification did not disclose that the appellants were sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
