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

1954 Supreme(Bom) 70

G.P.BHUTT
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
WASUDEO – Respondent


ORDER

This reference under section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is directed against the conviction and sentence of the non-applicant under section 24(1)(a) of the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act).

2. The non-applicant is a registered dealer under the Act from 29th September, 1950. Prior to that date he dealt in timber cut from the Government forest without a registration certificate. He was accordingly prosecuted under section 24(1)(a) for breach of section 8(1) of the Act. The defence was two-fold. It was first contended that his taxable quantum was below Rs. 5,000. It was next urged that he was not a manufacturer or producer of the goods within the meaning of section 2(1)(a) of the Act, and, therefore, was not a dealer who was liable to pay tax under the Act as contemplated by section 8(1). The defence was negatived and he was convicted and sentenced.

3. The only point that was urged in support of the reference was that the non-applicant only cut the trees and made them in a transportable form and could not, therefore, be said to be a dealer who manufactured or produced the goods within the meaning of section 2(1)(a) of the Act. The finding on the




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