9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (9) TMI 403X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions. So they are disposed of by a common order. We shall deal with the facts in W.P. No. 3396 of 1982. In this writ petition the validity of a notice dated 30th April, 1982 issued by the first respondent, Commercial Tax Officer (Intelligence) No. III, is challenged. Prior to the impugned notice, the first respondent had issued a notice dated 27th April, 1982 calling upon the petitioner to prod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overnment over the entire State. In other words these ten officers along with certain other officers had concurrent jurisdiction all over the State. The validity of the notifications conferring such powers was questioned in Sri Balaji Rice Company v. Commercial Tax Officer [1984] 55 STC 292 and a Bench of this Court struck down the said notifications. So far as the present writ petition is concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tated by the learned Government Pleader that the Government has since issued a notification delimiting the jurisdictional areas of these officers and their jurisdiction is confined to certain specified areas. He points out that the concurrent jurisdiction is no longer in force now. May be so, but even this would not validate the impugned notice because the notification delimiting the areas of juri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
