9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rfere with the impugned order - SLP dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v., Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv., Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR, Mr. Apurv Singhvi, Adv., Mr. Ajay Pal, AOR, Mr. Varun Chugh, Adv., Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv., Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR, Mr. Shadan Farasat, Aag, Sr. Adv., Mr. Talha Abdul Rehman, D.A.G., Ms. Nupur Kumar, AOR, Mr. Aman Naqvi, Adv. Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, AOR ORDER PER SLP (C) NO(S).34086/2015 AND OTHER CONNECTED MATTERS: List on 05.03.2025 to be heard immediately after the fresh cases are heard. SLP(C) NO. 26270-26273 OF 2019 (Item 11.3): 1. We have heard Mr. Yogendra Aldak, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned senior counsel for the respondent(s)-State and others. 2. We have perused the impugned order. 3, The High Court has relegated t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e have considered the said judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner(s) in light of Entry 28 Part B Schedule II of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2007, which, for the sake of immediate reference, is extracted and reads as under: SCHEDULE-II PART-B List of IT Products taxed at 5% 28 Cell Phones and its parts but excluding Cell Phones with M.R.P. exceeding rupees ten thousands. 11. We have heard learned counsel for the respondent(s)-assessees, who have supported the impugned judgment and have contended that the judgment of the Allahabad High Court is just and proper and has correctly distinguished the judgment of this Court in Nokia India Private Limited's case (supra). It was submitted that wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
