9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (9) TMI 546X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ets and the like in the State of Karnataka. 2.. On June 20, 1986, a notification was issued by the respondent-State under section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. Thereby the tax payable by a dealer under section 5 of the Act on television sets and components manufactured in Karnataka was reduced to 2 per cent. At that point of time the tax payable by dealers in television sets under the Act was 4 per cent. On March 28, 1987, the respondent-State issued another notification whereby the reduced tax payable by dealers in television sets and components manufactured in Karnataka was enhanced from 2 to 3 per cent. On the same date the rate of tax payable by dealers in television sets and components was enhanced from 4 to 6 per cent. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... invalidation could not be employed in exercise of powers under article 226. Accordingly these writ petitions were also dismissed. 5.. It has been fairly pointed out by learned counsel for the appellants that the learned Government Pleader had, in relation to the Solidaire appeal, stated to the division Bench, on instructions, that the sales tax authorities proposed to recover the difference in duty from manufacturers within the State having regard to the fact that the notifications giving them the benefit of a lower rate of tax had been struck down. 6.. Learned counsel for the appellants drew our attention to the judgment of this Court in West Bengal Hosiery Association v. State of Bihar [1988] 71 STC 298 (SC); (1988) 4 SCC 134. In that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State of Andhra Pradesh to recover the amounts of the sales tax which would have been paid but for these notifications. Counsel for the local manufacturers pointed out that, having regard to these notifications, the local manufacturers were disentitled by reason of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act to recover the difference in the amounts from their customers and would have been liable to penalties if they had done so. This Court, treating the writ petitions as review petitions, noted that the attention of the learned Judges who delivered the judgment in Indian Cement [1988] 69 STC 305 (SC); (1988) 1 SCC 743 had, apparently, not been drawn to the fact that the local manufacturers would have to pay by way of sales ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
