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

1983 Supreme(MP) 44

G.G.SOHANI, R.K.VIJAYWARGIYA
Kedarmal Sarda – Appellant
Versus
Sales Tax Officer – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.M.Chaphekar, S.KULSHRESTHA,

JUDGMENT :

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

( 2. ) THE material facts giving rise to this petition briefly are as follows : The petitioners have averred that they have entered into a partnership firm carrying on business of manufacturing rubber matting and foam products in the name and style of M/s. Relief Foam; that in the course of their business, the petitioners import latex rubber, which is the raw material for their manufacture and the value of these imports comes to Rs. 1,000 in a year and that as the turnover of the petitioners from the sale of manufactured goods was likely to exceed the limit of Rs. 10,000 specified in Sub-section (5) of Section 4 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the petitioners submitted an application to respondent No. 1, the Sales Tax Officer, Circle VIII, under Section 16 of the Act for their registration as a dealer under the Act. Along with that application, the petitioners also filed a separate application for registration as a dealer under Section 7 (2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioners have further averred that though respondent No. 1 had passed a







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