TMI Blog1998 (4) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the learned single Judge allowing the writ petitions. 2.. The facts of the case are that the writ petitioners filed writ petitions assailing the amendment made to the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or Sale Therein Act, 1979 which resulted in deletion of section 28 of the main Act with retrospective effect from the date of interpretation of Chapter II-A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itions. 3.. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petitions holding that the amendment Act without obtaining the assent of the President is violative of the Constitution and further held that: Since in the present case admittedly, the said constitutional requirement was not complied with, therefore, it is declared that the deletion of section 28 of the Act by Karnataka Act 1 of 1996 is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r that in case the Supreme Court holds in favour of the tax-payers, it is open to the writ petitioners to approach this Court on renewing the request. 5.. We make it clear that this judgment will apply to all the tax-payers without further approaching this Court, and the judgment in Arun Manikchand Shah v. State of Karnataka [1999] 115 STC 64; ILR 1995 Kar 3080 is no more good law in view of thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
