9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (12) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 36(3) of the Act. The petitioner filed appeals to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Appeals, Bombay, against the aforesaid levies, contending inter alia that the two levies could not be justified and section 36(3) of the Act was ultra vires the State Legislature of the State of Maharashtra. While passing orders on appeal, the said Assistant Commissioner enhanced the levy for the year 1973 to Rs. 5,388.07 and confirmed the levy for the year 1974. It is stated on behalf of the respondents and it is equally obvious that since the penalties were not paid, certificates to that effect have been obtained from the Collector of Bombay and they have been forwarded to the Collector here at Madras and the process under the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned counsel for the petitioner is repelled. Secondly, the learned counsel would submit that the very order of levy of penalty by the second respondent under section 36(3) of the Act cannot be sustained because the said provision is confiscatory in nature and violative of article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner agitated the matter further by way of appeals to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Appeals, Bombay, against the order of the second respondent. The appellate orders have gone against him. It is true that a Division Bench of this Court in Veeri Chettiar v. Sales Tax Officer [1970] 26 STC 579 has held that this Court has the power to exercise all the powers conferred on it under article 226(PA) of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the same. The orders in appeals have been passed a long time back, in September, 1977. Having allowed them to go unchallenged at the appropriate time before the appropriate forum or forums, it will not be proper for the petitioner to approach this Court, when measures to realise the dues, practically by way of execution are taken and canvass the alleged illegality of the original orders. It will not be appropriate on the facts of this case, at this juncture, for this Court to take note of the present grievance of the petitioner against the original orders and issue the highly prerogative writ sought for, the issuance of which is at the discretion of this Court. The petitioner could as well give vent to his grievance in this behalf before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
