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

1983 Supreme(Mad) 338

RAMANUJAM, RATNAM
Deputy Commissioner (C. T. ), Coimbatore Division, Coimbatore – Appellant
Versus
M. Murugesan and Bros – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:K. S. Bakthavatsalam, Advocate.

Judgment :-

RAMANUJAM, J.

The point that arises for consideration in this case is whether they levy of penalty under section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959According to the Revenue, the Tribunal has been properly understood the scope of the provisions of section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971, on a proper interpretation of section 3(2) of the said Act, section 22 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959

It is seen from the order of the Tribunal that the Tribunal, in support of its view, that section 22 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, would not apply to surcharge leviable under section 3 of the Surcharge Act, 1971, has referred to and relied upon the decision of this Court in Shah & Co. v. State of Madras and of the Supreme Court in Khemka & Co. v. State of Maharashtra. We are, however, of the opinion that the said decisions have no application to the facts of the present case. Those cases dealt with penalty, leviable under the Central Sales Tax Act, and the question arose whether the levy of penalty could be sustained under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, without a specific enabling provision in t

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