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

1963 Supreme(MP) 105

P.V.DIXIT, K.L.PANDEY
GHANSHYAMDAS CHHOTALAL – Appellant
Versus
SALES TAX OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.L.Halve, H.M.Thakarm, J.M.THAKAR, R.J.BHAVE

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) BY this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner questions the legality of the assessment to sales tax made against a partnership firm doing business under the name and style of M/s Chhotalal Keshaoram and co. , Rajanandgaon, by an order passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Raipur, on 20th July 1954. By that order the taxable turnover of the firm for the period from 17th february 1950 to 30th November 1951 was determined at Rs. 1,96,000/-and the amount of sales tax payable by the firm was found to be Rs. 6,125/ -. The petitioner also challenges the legality of the notices issued to the' firm in Form XII on 8th December 1952, 23rd October 1953, 6th May 1954 and 24th May 1954, under Section 11 (5) of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, (here, inafter referred to as the Act), pursuant to which the impugned assessment was made. He prays that the said notices, the assessment order made by the Sales tax Officer, Raipur, the demand notices for payment of Rs. 6125/-, and the decisions of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Raipur, and the commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, upholding the assessment made






















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