Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.31 seconds)Article 301 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Goodyear India Ltd. Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana & Anr. Etc. Etc on 19 October, 1989
4. The said objections were not accepted and assessment
was made. The petitioner did not take remedy of appeal on the
ground that the said remedy was onerous requiring payment of
assessed tax and penalty. After filing of the petition, amendment
was made to challenge levy of purchase tax in view of the judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goodyear India Limited V. State
of Haryana and another (1990) 76 STC 71 striking down the levy
of purchase tax. In the amended petition following substantial
questions of law were framed:-
Hotel Balaji And Others Etc. Etc vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors. Etc. Etc on 22 October, 1992
7. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner has not been
able to advance any argument, learned counsel for the State has
been called upon to assist the Court. He submits that issue of levy of
purchase tax has since been concluded by the judgment of the
Supreme Court in Hotel Balaji Vs. State of A.P. AIR 1993 SC
1048 reversing the earlier view taken in Goodyear India Limited.
Accordingly, question Nos. (iii) to (x) stand covered against the
petitioner.
State Of Haryana vs M/S.Maruti Udyog Ltd. & Ors on 7 September, 2000
Question No. (i) is covered against the assessee by the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. Maruti
Udhyog Limited 2000(7) Supreme Court Cases 348. Question
No.(i) has, thus, to be decided against the petitioner.
M/S Co-Operative Company Ltd vs Commissioner Of Trade Tax, U.P on 24 April, 2007
"A close scrutiny of the aforesaid provision shows that
emphasis has been made to include any sum charged for
anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the
time of or before delivery thereof. It follows that after the
agricultural produce has been purchased by the dealer in
inter se bidding then for taking its delivery it has to incur
certain expenditure, which are either on or before the
delivery. The provision is illustrative with regard to the
aggregate of the amounts of purchases and parts of
purchases actually made by any dealer. Therefore, it
would include the price of bag, labour charges, stitching
charges, price of jute thread, dammi and carriage etc. In
that regard, the contention of the learned State counsel
deserves to be accepted that there is no delivery taken
before weighment, which is not possible without packing
the agricultural produce in a gunny bag. We also find
substance in the contention of the learned counsel that
even stitching and labour incurred for all these activities
have to be included for effective delivery of the goods,
which would include carriage also.".......
"Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble the Supreme
Court in the case of Co-Operative Company Limited v.
Commissioner of Trade Tax, (2007) 4 SCC 480. There
Civil Writ Petition No.5153 of 1987 -7-
****
is no dispute that the price of gunny bags was included in
the total consideration amount. Hence, it has to be
regarded as 'sale'." ......
1