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

1973 Supreme(P&H) 168

HARBANS SINGH, PREM CHAND JAIN
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Dunlop India Limited – Respondent


Judgment

Harbans Singh, J.

1. Facts necessary for the decision of this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned single Judge in Civil Writ No. 3289 of 1971 may be stated as follows:

2. A consignment of tyres and tubes was sent by M/s. Dunlop India Limited (hereinafter referred to as the company) from West Bengal to their sub-depot at Jullundur through Messrs. Central Goods Transport Corporation, Calcutta, on 29th June, 1970. At the Shamboo barrier in Patiala District on the vehicle being checked by the Taxation Inspector on duty on 6th July, 1970, there was found some discrepancy between the value of the goods as given in form ST XXIV, which was Rs. 50,000, and the invoices and other documents, which showed the value as Rs. 1,15,518.25. For this discrepancy, the goods were seized and were released only on payment of Rs. 7,000. This was done under Section 14-B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. Sub-section (8) of Section 14-B of the Act is to the following effect:

Where the declaration made under Sub-section (3) is false in respect of any particulars mentioned therein, the officer-in-charge of the ch








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