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

1991 Supreme(Cal) 94

RUMA PAL
HIMALAYA RUBBER PRODUCTS LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
BOARD FOR INDUSTRIAL AND FINANCIAL RECONSTRUCTION – Respondent


JUDGMENT

SMT. RUMA PAL, J. - The petitioner No. 1 is a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1956 Act") and under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1941 Act").

The grievance of the petitioners is that the sales tax authorities are refusing to issue declaration forms either under the 1956 Act or under the 1941 Act. It is stated that the ground for such refusal is the petitioners' failure to pay the arrear of sales tax dues. The petitioner No. 1 is, it is contended, being deprived thereby of the concessional rates of tax available to registered dealers in contravention of section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985.

The petitioner No. 1 is admittedly liable to pay sales tax both under the 1956 Act and under the 1941 Act. In this case we are only concerned with the refusal of the sales tax authority to give declaration forms under rule 4 of the Central Sales Tax (West Bengal) Rules, 1958, to the petitioner No. 1. Inasmuch as the questions to be decided in this matter ultimately involve only a question of interpretation of statutory provisions the matter is being

































































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