9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (4) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith him), for the respondent. M.C. Chagla, Senior Advocate (S.S. Javali, Advocate, and O.C. Mathur and J.B. Dadachanji and Co., with him), for the appellant. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the court was delivered by SHAH, J.-The Sales Tax Tribunal, State of Maharashtra, submitted for opinion two questions to the High Court of Bomb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 2(13) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, hereinafter called the Act. In considering the second question, the High Court felt that on the material available to them the question could not be answered. It appears that counsel appearing for the parties also agreed that an answer to the second question need not be recorded and the parties may be given another opportunity to establish their respecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt had only to answer the questions submitted to them. They could not remand the case to the Tribunal for recording evidence and a finding. If the statement of the case was not sufficient to enable them to answer the question raised, the High Court could, under section 34(4) of the Act refer the case to the Tribunal to make such additions thereto or alterations therein. After the supplementary s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f any such case shall decide the question of law raised thereby, and shall deliver its judgment thereon containing the grounds on which such decision is founded, and shall send to the Tribunal a copy of such judgment under the seal of the court and the signature of the Registrar, and the Tribunal shall dispose of the case accordingly. It is implicit that all questions submitted to the High Court m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
