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

1984 Supreme(Ker) 136

PARIPOORNAN
VINODAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The petitioner is doing business in coconuts at Mahe, Pondicherry State. He is a registered dealer at Pondicherry, Exts. P1 and P2 are Certificates of Registration under the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Rules respectively. His turnover was determined by the Mahe authorities as evidenced by Ext. P3. He used to purchase coconuts from Mahe and send them to outside the State in lorry loads. He did so on 20-3-1982. The sale bill and delivery note accompanied the transport (Exts. P4 and P5). The Intelligence Officer, Sales fax Department suspected the genuineness of the transport and in exercise of the powers vested in him under S.29-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and R.35-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules initiated proceedings, evidenced by Exts. P10 to P12. The petitioner, offered security, evidenced by Exts. P13 to P15. In this Original Petition the petitioner assails Exts.10, P11 and P12 proceedings. He contends that S.29-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and also R.35-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules are unconstitutional, void and inoperative. There is a prayer to quash Exts. P10, P11 and P12. Other reliefs are also p




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