9911796707
TMI Blog1958 (2) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchases from dealers at Calcutta and Bombay. It is stated that for the assessment year 1954-55 the respondent collected Rs. 29,199-3-6 as sales tax on the sale transactions in automobile parts effected by the petitioner. It is the petitioner's contention that the said levy and collection are not authorised by law. For the year 1955-56 the petitioner submitted monthly returns and paid a sales tax of Rs. 36,564-3-9 provisionally. On 10th January, 1958, the 2nd respondent issued a notice to the petitioner threatening assessment to the best of his judgment. It is stated by the petitioner that the said assessment is only "an escaped one which is amenable to assessment" under rule 32 of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act of 1950 and he submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, appoint. By means of a notification dated 10th June, 1957, the Government appointed 15th June, 1957, as the date from which the rest of the Act shall come into force. The Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957, the validity of which the petitioner impeaches, were published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, Part I, dated 15th June, 1957, and they came into force on the same date. The Act having come into force on 15th June, 1957, and the rules having been published on the same date, it is not a case of the Government promulgating the rules on a date anterior to the date of the coming into force of the Act. On the other hand, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ution refer to freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse with or within a State. The States in India have full power of imposing tax subject only to the condition that such tax is imposed on all goods of the same kind produced or manufactured in the taxing State although such taxation is undoubtedly calculated to fetter inter-State trade and commerce. I do not find that there is any substance in this contention either. The above two contentions were only raised before me though the affidavit mentions that the assessment for the year 1955-56 is barred by limitation. Assuming that the contentions of the petitioner are well founded, there is nothing to preclude him from raising them before the second respondent in response to the notice issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
