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

1955 Supreme(Bom) 138

J.C.SHAH
State – Appellant
Versus
Kantilal Maganlal – Respondent


JUDGMENT -

1. The accused Kantilal Maganlal Patel of Ahmedabad was charged with having committed offences under Section 465 read with Section 471 of the Penal Code and Section 36 (g), Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. If, was the case for the prosecution that the accused was given a registration certificate under the Bombay Sales Tax Act and was doing business in the name of Shobha Engineering Works at Ahmedabad. The accused sent quarterly statements ending 30-6-1949 and was called upon to verify the same with his accounts.

At that time the accused produced his account books and on inspection of those books it was found that the accused had prepared a bill for Rs. 212-8-0 showing that certain goods were sold in the Bombay State to a registered party though in fact the goods had been sent outside the State. The accused produced the forged bill before the Sales Tax Inspector, Ahmedabad.

On these facts sanction was obtained from the Sales Tax Collector and the accused was prosecuted. At the trial the accused admitted his guilt. He stated that he pleaded guilty and pleaded for mercy. The learned trial Magistrate accepted the plea of guilty and thought that it was a case in which the accused sh








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