TMI Blog1994 (8) TMI 286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be convenient to briefly mention the facts in C.W.P. No. 2670 of 1983. The petitioner is a contractor appointed to carry on railway booking agency at Rewari in the State of Haryana. As such contractor he books goods and issues tickets on behalf of the Indian Railway. He also arranges delivery of the goods received from other stations. By the Haryana General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1983, sections 37 and 38 of the principal Act have been amended. Under the principal Act, a contractor of railway booking agency was not required to obtain any licence under the provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, nor was he required to submit any return of the transaction of goods. Under the amended provisions, however, the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chowk, Paonta Sahib, he has opened an office at Railway Road, Jagadhri. He is also maintaining a godown at village Telipura on Jagadhri-Paonta Sahib Road outside the limits of Jagadhri-Yamuna Nagar town. In the course of his business to run the railway out-agency he transports goods from Paonta Sahib to Jagadhri railway station and vice versa.He employs the use of motor vehicles and other modes of transport. He is maintaining the records as required by the railways and also obtains Rahdari receipts while crossing the municipal limits of Jagadhri. The State Government under section 37 of the Act notified the establishment of a check barrier at railway station, Jagadhri on June 10, 1986. On July 14, 1986, the petitioner's representative was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Bench of this Court in Monga Road Lines (Regd.) v. State of Haryana [1990] 77 STC 171. It follows that section 37 of the Act providing for the establishment of check-posts, barriers and inspection of goods in transit, rule 45 and forms 38 and 39 of the Rules having been upheld, the petitions must fail in so far as section 37 of the Act is concerned. Mr. R.P. Sawhney, learned counsel for the petitioner in C.W.P. No. 4775 of 1986, contended that since necessary provisions existed in the railway manual and those provisions were being complied with, there was no reason why the goods booked at the out-agency needed a special check by the authorities at the sales tax barrier. Putting of such restrictions according to Mr. Sawhney, were not on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
