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

1995 Supreme(Pat) 121

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, K.VENKATASWAMI
Eureka Forbes Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

S.J.Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. All these writ petitions involving common point of law were filed by the same petitioner relating to the assessment of sales tax for different periods, i.e., 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91. Thereby they are disposed of by common orders.

2. Eureka Forbes Ltd., petitioner, a limited company having its office at Patna, Ranchi, Jamshedpur, etc., is doing business of selling vacuum cleaner. Petitioner has challenged notices issued by the respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jamshedpur, under Sec. 19(1) read with Sec. 17(2) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (annexure 1 series in respective writ petitions) ; orders of reassessment (annexure 2 series of respective writ petitions) and orders passed in revisional applications by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Patna (annexure 3/1), by which the orders of reassessment have been upheld and the revision petitions have been dismissed.

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows :

The assessments with regard to sale of vacuum cleaners for the aforesaid periods, i.e., 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91 were made by the assessing authority treating the vacuum cleaners as "machinery", whi






























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