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

1961 Supreme(SC) 184

J.L.KAPUR, M.HIDAYATULLAH, S.R.DASS, T.L.VENKATARAMA AYYAR, J.C.SHAH
State Of Assam – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Chandra Dey – Respondent


Advocates:
A.V.VISHWANATHA SASTRI, NAUNIT LAL

Judgment

HIDAYATULLAH, J. : This appeal has been filed by the State of Assam against a judgment of the High Court of Assam dated July 16, 1956.* By the judgment under appeal, the High Court held that S. 15 of the Assam Sales Tax Act. 1947 and Rule 80 framed under the Act were ultra vires, being a breach of Art. 286 (2) of the Constitution. The High Court granted a certificate under Art. 132(1) of the Constitution.

* See (S) AIR 1956 Assam 177.

2. R. C. Day, the answering respondent, is a wholesale dealer in tea, and has been in business since 1940. He registered himself as a dealer under the Assam Sales Tax Act on January 14, 1950. His business consists mainly of buying tea in Assam and selling it either in Assam or in Calcutta. In respect of tea sold in Calcutta. R. C. Dey consigns the tea to himself after purchasing it in Assam. This tea is then approved by prospective purchasers, to whom the documents of title are endorsed on receipt of the price.

3. In 1951 the Assam Sales Tax Act was amended by the Assam Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1951 (4 of 1951). Section 15 of the Act before the amendment provided that in calculating the net turnover of a registered dealer for tax purposes all s


















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