9911796707
TMI Blog1958 (7) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... September, 1946, which is exhibited in the case as Ex. 1. It was alleged that under section 13 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act read with rule 22 made under the Bombay Sales Tax Ordinance return was required to be submitted within a certain date of each quarter ending on 31st January, 1953, and 31st March, 1953. It was stated that though it was required to be furnished within one month from the end of the quarter, the returns for both these quarters were made on 18th July, 1953, and it is for this delay in filing of the returns of the sales as required under the Sales Tax Act that the prosecution is launched under section 36(b) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act after obtaining sanction from the Collector as required by the Act. The three Appeals Nos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d were the registered dealers under Ex. No. 1, registration certificate, and whether they were liable to furnish quarterly returns as registered dealers or otherwise under Ordinance No. 2 of 1952. As to the sanction, the learned Magistrate held that it was a valid sanction. But on the second point, the learned Magistrate held that the respondents were not the registered dealers under the Act concluding therefrom that they were not liable to furnish any returns under the provision of the Ordinance. He, therefore, acquitted them. The learned Magistrate while dealing with this question has observed that the definition of the word "dealer" speaks of a person and it does not appear to include a partnership firm and that in view of this position ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its members in the definition of the word "dealer" has a special purpose of its own and that is to include within the definition of the word "sales" made as mentioned therein which otherwise may not amount to sales and could not have been intended to exclude the operation of the definition as given in the General Clauses Act. That also appears to be abundantly clear from the fact that dealings between the members of the club, society or an association, which normally may not amount to sales are intended to be included in the definition of "sale". We are, therefore, so far as at present advised, of the opinion that a partnership firm would be included in the definition of the word "dealer" as given in section 2, sub-section (6), of the Bomba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss Ramachandra Vishnu Gharpure shows that Ex. 1 was issued in favour of Ratilal Dahyabhai Shah of Messrs R.M. Shah Co. This witness has further stated that Ratilal Dahyabhai Shah is a registered dealer under Ex. 1. He has stated that in Ex. 1 none of the accused is a registered dealer. The other witness is one Vishnu Vaman Gadkari, who is a Sales Tax Officer and apparently a responsible officer at that. He says in his cross-examination: "It is true that Ex. 1 is issued in favour of Ratilal Dahyabhai Shah of Messrs R. M. Shah Co. None of the names of the accused appears in Ex. 1". Mr. Gumaste says that this is merely a mistake and that this evidence should be discarded. It is difficult to accept this argument. The evidence that has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
