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

2005 Supreme(Kar) 120

S.ABDUL NAZEER
RAJOSHREE CEMENT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Advocates:
A.RAMA, D.Venkatesh, G.SARANGAN, Niloufer Akbar

ABDUL NAZEER, J.

( 1 ) IN these petitions the question that falls for consideration is "whether passing of a Legislation by itself confers a right on the Petitioners to file a Writ Petition unless a cause of action arises thereof '?

( 2 ) PETITIONERS are Companies registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It is contended that they receive various notified goods from time to time from other States meant for use or ' consumption in their business. They have filed these Writ Petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 3 and 4 of the Karnataka Special Tax on Entry of Certain Goods Act, 2004, and the notifications issued thereunder in No. FD 133 CET 2004 dated 30. 09. 2004.

( 3 ) I have heard Sri G. Sarangan, Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners and Niloufer Akbar, Learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents.

( 4 ) THE State Legislature has passed a Legislation called "the Karnataka Special Tax on Entry of Certain Goods Act, 2004" (for short 'the Act') published in the Karnataka Gazette on 11th August, 2004. The said Act has been passed to provide for levy of Special Tax on Entry of Certain Goods into local areas for consumption, use or sale therein.























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