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

1976 Supreme(Cal) 184

A.K.SEN, M.N.ROY
OM PRAKASH GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.Burman, PRITI RAY, SAMARENDRA NATH DUTTA

ANIL K. SEN, J.

( 1 ) IN this appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the question that falls for determination is as to whether the appellant who makes camphor cubes locally out of camphor granules and sells such cubes in the local market can be said to be a dealer within the meaning of Section 2 (b) of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1954 ). The appellant, as the proprietor of the firm M/s. S. D. Gupta and Co. , carries on business in camphor cubes. He purchases camphor in granules and makes camphor cubes out of such granules with the help of a power operated machine and sells such camphor cubes in the market with distinctive brand names of "elephant, Moon and Arati". Originally, he had himself registered as a dealer under Section 7 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1941 ). On his business turnover for the period November, 1955, to 30th June, 1958, the appellant was assessed to sales tax under Section 11 (2) of the Act of 1941. Such assessment was made on 9th February, 1959. The appellant, however, objected to such assessment on the plea that he deals exclusively in camphor, which i









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