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

2001 Supreme(SC) 536

Y.K.SABHARWAL, R.C.LAHOTI, S.P.BHARUCHA
Shahnas Trading Company – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent


ORDER

We see no reason to interfere with the judgment and order under appeal which, in turn, has followed an earlier decision of the High Court in Hazee Mohammed Meera Sahib & Sons v. Sales Tax Officer, II Circle, Trivandrum & Ors.1. We find no merit in the submission that the words "to satisfy himself that there is no evasion of tax" in Section 29A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act should be read only in the context of the words "to verify the documents required by sub-section (2) of Section 29 to be in the possession of the person transporting the goods". That would be to limit the power of the officer to the varification of documents and to render the words "and to satisfy himself that there is no evasion of tax" otiose, which cannot be done.

We need to point out that the writ petition filed before the High Court did not question the constitutionality of any provision and, therefore, the question of constitutionality cannot now be raised in the grounds of the special leave petition.

The civil appeals are dismissed with costs.

Appeals dismissed.

**************

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