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

1955 Supreme(All) 9

M.L.CHATURVEDI
JAGAT BEHARI TANDON – Appellant
Versus
SALES-TAX OFFICER, ETAWAH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.D.Pant, R.S.PATHAK


M. L. CHATURVEDI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

( 2 ) FIRM Banagopal. Amamath was constituted in the year 1948 and it used to deal in bullion and ornaments. The petitioner was a partner in this firm having a one-third share. The other two-third was owned by Amamath. and Kedar Nath in the proportion of one-half each. The firm was registered under Section 8a, U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, as a registered dealer. The firm elected to submit quarterly returns of its turn over, as provided by Rule 39 (1) of the Rules framed under the Act. Amar-nath subsequently left the firm on 16-7-1950, and the other two partners, namely, kedar Nath and the petitioner then became owners of this firm in the proportion of half and half. The firm was subsequently assessed to sales tax by an order dated the 19th July 1952. The reconstituted firm was known as Bansgopa! Amarnath and this firm was also dissolved on 18-4-1952. The assessment was, however, made on this firm for the year 1951-52 on 17-8-1953. The taxes were not paid and the papers were sent to the Collector for realising the amounts assessed by both the orders, mentioned above, as arrears of land revenue. The pe













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