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

1953 Supreme(AP) 10

P.JAGANMOHAN REDDY, M.R.A.ANSARI
KAYANI AND CO. – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Seethal Pershad, for the petitioner.
N. Narasimha Iyengar, for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J.

This is a petition for the issue of an appropriate writ under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the Sales Tax Commissioner not to collect tax on (a) double roti, parata and shirmal, (b) on cooked rice and (c) milk, milk products and (d) fresh eggs. The Advocate for the petitioner confines his case to the first two items only as it is said that the Sales Tax Commissioner has accepted the exemptions of items Nos. (c) and (d). Even with respect to item No. 1, it appears from the return make by the assessee which is shown to us by the learned Advocate for the Commissioner that exemption has only been claimed with respect to double roti, shirmal and tanure-ki-roti, but parata has not been shown in the statement. The exemption claimed is under item 3, i.e., "bread", and item 1, i.e., "all cereals and pulses including all forms of rice (except when sold in sealed containers)" of Schedule 1 of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act (XIV of 1950).

The first question that falls for determination is whether double roti, shirmal, parata and chapathi etc., can be called bread. The learned Advocate for the respondent states that except for double roti, the othe




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