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

1968 Supreme(Kar) 56

A.R.SOMNATH IYER, AHMED ALI KHAN
TEJANASA TULJANSA BHANDAGE – Appellant
Versus
FIRST COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, II CIRCLE, GADAG – Respondent


SOMNATH IYER, J.

( 1 ) A certain Kabadi who was carrying on business as a radio and cloth dealer at Gadag was a dealer under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957. On 28th February, 1963, the whole of his business was purchased by Bhandage who is the petitioner in these four revision petitions. When he made the purchase, Kabadi's turnover for the period between 1st April, 1962, and 30th June, 1962, had been assessed to sales tax by an order of assessment made on 6th December, 1962. The turnover relating to the years 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62 formed the subject-matter of subsequent assessment proceedings in which assessments were respectively made in the years 1963, 1964 and 1965. When the tax and penalty payable by Kabadi were not paid by the petitioner, an application was presented to the Judicial Magistrate, Gadag, under section 13 (3) of the Act for their recovery. The petitioner's objection to that recovery which rested on more than one ground was negatived, and these revision petitions are directed against the orders made by the magistrate in that way.

( 2 ) MR. Srinivasan advanced three arguments on behalf of the petitioner. The brat was that since the orders of assessment in r
















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