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

2003 Supreme(Cal) 588

D.K.SETH, RAJENDRA NATH SINHA
GYANENDRA NATH – Appellant
Versus
PROFESSION TAX OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BIDYUT KIRAN MUKHERJI, HIRAK MITRA, SEHA ROY

D. K. SETH, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 25th february, 2003 passed in Writ Petition No. 4406 (W) of 2002 dismissing the writ petition on the ground of absence of jurisdiction of the High Court in view of section 14 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 (1987 Act ).

( 2 ) MR. Hirak Mitter, learned Counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, raised two questions. First, that the writ petition could not be dismissed as not maintainable in view of section 14 of the 1987 Act barring jurisdiction of the high Court. The second is that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners, though posted at Calcutta, are not persons employed in West Bengal and thus are not subject to the West Bengal State Tax on professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1979 (WB Act ). He had raised several limbs of this point, namely, that the salary of the appellants-petitioners posted at Calcutta are being paid by their employer at Chhattisgarh as such they are carrying on profession in Chhattisgarh and not in West Bengal. Even though they may be absent from Chhattisgarh still they are deemed to be employed in Chhattisgarh in view o


















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