SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 88

A. M. AHMADI, SUJATA V. MANOHAR
Phool Chand Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

A.M. Ahmadi, CJI. - These two appeals arise out of a common judgment delivered on 14.8.1978 by a Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh whereby it repelled the contention of the appellant firm that Rule 12(3)(ii) of the Central Sales Tax (Andhra Pradesh) Rules was directory and not mandatory and if held to be mandatory the said rule was ultra vires the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, hereinafter called the Act .

2. The appellant, M/s. Phool Chand Gupta, was at all material times a dealer in oil seeds. This firm was assessed under the Act by the Commercial Tax Officer, Vizianagaram, for the relevant assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73. He granted exemption on a turnover in respect of mohwa seeds on the plea that the seeds were purchased by the firm while in transit and were sold to dealers outside the State. The Deputy Commissioner, however, noticed that the assessee had actually purchased the Railway Receipts relating to the mohwa seeds from non-resident dealers while the goods were in transit from places outside the State and were sold to non-resident dealers. He, therefore, opined that the exemption granted was irregular since the transaction fell within Section
















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top