Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2002 (7) TMI 763

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der at annexure A/2 is also liable to be set aside and quashed being apparently illegal, contrary to the provisions of section 19B of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, mala fide prejudicial and unconstitutional. The petitioner has further prayed for a writ of prohibition restraining respondent No. 1 from recovering from the petitioner any tax, penalty and/or interest in terms of order at annexure A/2 and the notice of demand in pursuant thereto. 2.. As far as the challenge to the constitutional validity of section 47(4A) of the Act is concerned, it is submitted by Mr. R.D. Pathak, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, that he is not pressing the said prayer in this petition. In view of the above statement, we are not inclined .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bited by section 56 of the Act. In these circumstances, the said oil-millers have been liable to purchase tax on their purchases by virtue of section 19(B)(1)(ii). The petitioner has further stated that out of the aforesaid sales against declarations in form 24-B, the petitioner has sold groundnuts to the tune of Rs. 14,37,896 to one M/s. Jalaram Trading Co. of Jamnagar, holding registration certificate No. 70109433 dated September 17, 1983 issued by the Sales Tax Officer having jurisdiction over its case. 5.. During the course of assessment proceedings of the petitioner for the relevant period, somewhere in October, 1987, respondent No. 1 proposed to disallow the sales made by the petitioner to M/s. Jalaram Trading Co. of Jamnagar agains .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... laim of exemption to the petitioner in respect of sales made to the said buyer and raising the demand of Rs. 1,01,185 as stated above. 6.. The petitioner has further drawn our attention to the notice dated April 9, 1985 and October 7, 1985 produced at annexure A/3 from which it becomes clear that the buyer was a dealer registered under the Act at least up to Vad Amas of Adhik Shravan of S.Y. 2041 inasmuch as the liability to submit return under the provisions of the Act was only on the registered dealer and annexure A/3 has been issued to the buyer by the Sales Tax Officer on the basis that it was a dealer registered under the Act during that period. 7.. From the aforesaid facts, it was vehemently argued by Mr. Pathak that the registrat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to show cause why its registration should not be cancelled. After giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the said M/s. Jalaram Trading Co., the Sales Tax Officer by his order dated January 27, 1984 cancelled the registration of M/s. Jalaram Trading Co. w.e.f. November 5, 1983. Mr. Mehta has further submitted that with regard to the letter dated December 19, 1985 addressed by the Sales Tax Officer (Enforcement), Jamnagar, to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Enforcement), Rajkot, the date November 5, 1985 mentioned therein was a typographical mistake and the said typographical mistake was rectified by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Enforcement), Rajkot, by his letter dated December 3, 1986 to the Sales Tax Officer, Jamna .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct that the registration was cancelled on November 5, 1983 as it transpires from the record that the notice placed on the board of the Sales Tax Department indicated the date of November 5, 1985. Simply by virtue of correspondence between the authorities, it cannot be presumed that the said date was known to the other persons. 11.. As a matter of fact there is specific rule to that effect, namely, rule 11 which deals with cancellation of certificate of registration and detailed procedure is prescribed in the said rule, which reads as under: "Rule 11. Cancellation of certificate of registration.-(1) An application for cancellation of registration under sub-section (7) of section 29 or sub-section (5) of section 30 shall be made to the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates