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

1992 Supreme(Kar) 353

K. C. SETTY – Appellant
Versus
ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates:
B.V.KATAGERI, H.L.DATTU, S.S.ANGADI

K. SHIVASHANKAR BHAT J. ,, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is a hotelier. A notice under Section 12-A of the Karnataka Sales tax Act, 1957, was issued pertaining to the assessment year 1984-85. Thereafter, an order was made on 24th July, 1987 overruling the objections of the assessee. Since the order was sought to be justified by the amendment made to the Constitution by which Article 366, clause (29-A) was introduced, the petitioner challenged the same by filing the present writ petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner has mainly sought the striking down of clause (29-A) (f) ofarticle 366 of the Constitution. The petitioner has also sought for the quashing of explanation (3-A) to the provisions of Section 2 (t) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. As a consequence, the petitioner has also sought for the setting aside of the order dated 24th July, 1987 made under Section 12-A.

( 3 ) ON merits, the petitioner contended that his objections were not considered bythe assessing authority while passing the order.

( 4 ) IT is too late for the petitioner to contend that the amendment to theconstitution is invalid. If so, automatically Explanation (3-A) to Section 2 (t) also cannot be challenged. The scope o











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