9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 676X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght for a direction, directing the fourth respondent to furnish the details of arrears as requested by the petitioner vide annexures F and F1, respectively. The petitioners herein are CL-2 licence holders carrying on business of vending arrack for ten years and registered dealers under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. When things stood thus, respondent No. 1 insisted upon the production of sales tax clearance certificate from respondents Nos. 2 and 3 for grant of licence. Accordingly, the petitioners have submitted their representations vide annexures F and F1. It is the case of petitioners that the impugned communication-cum-notices issued by the first respondent to these petitioners vide annexures D and E are one without jurisdiction a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners vide annexures F and F1 is concerned, it can be seen that, the said representations are dated April 8, 2008. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 on instructions from the office of the third respondent, who is present before the court along with the original records submitted that, the petitioners are due in arrears of tax for the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 in all a sum a of Rs. 1,85,332 and the petitioners, without paying the said arrears of sales tax are running the business. Therefore, the first respondent has issued the impugned communication-cum-notices dated March 19, 2008 for non-payment of arrears of sales tax i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these vital material facts before this court and come up before this court, pretending to be innocent and as if they are not aware of any tax liability due to be paid to respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and in a very convenient manner, have not revealed all these material facts before this court while filing the instant writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is liable to be dismissed in view of the suppression of material facts with exemplary cost. Further, it is pertinent to note that the representations given by the petitioners are dated April 8, 2008 and the petitioners have approached this court by presenting the instant writ petition the very next day, i.e., on April 9, 2008 without giving any breathing time to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
