Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 923 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2016 (9) TMI 923 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - TMI - Pendency of writ petition - Bombay Sales Tax Act - revival of petitioner's registration from 1st April, 1998 - principles of natural justice - Held that: - The legal questions and issues are kept open for decision in an appropriate case. In terms of the affidavit filed by the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax, the matter should be reexamined by the competent authority. If that competent authority is of the level of Deputy Commissioner or above, he shall .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

this order - writ petition disposed off - decided in favor of petitioner. - Writ Petition No. 6219 of 2007 - Dated:- 30-8-2016 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And B. P. Colabawalla, JJ. Mr. P. C. Joshi i/b Mr. N.B. Shah for the Petitioner Mr. V. A. Sonpal, Special Counsel for the Respondent ORDER P. C. 1. The petitioner has challenged by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the orders passed by the respondent No.3 dated 3rd November, 2006, Annexure-A, 6th August, 2005 passed by respondent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The Petitioners crave leave of this Hon ble 244/- are liable for 20% ST. Since appellant is a URD he is not entitled for set off under any Rules. Consequentially, appellant is also liable interest u/s. 36(3)(b) which is restricted to ₹ 3,84,795/-. Considering facts and circumstances of this case, penalty u/s. 36(2)(a) is restricted to ₹ 10,000/-. The assessing officer is directed to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance for amount of ₹ 2,12,301/- for the period 9.12.98 to 31.1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

made to the Divisional Administrative Officer i.e. the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax, Pune (Respondent No.3A herein) for condonation of delay in making the application for registration. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, the said application is pending since May 2006. He, therefore, prays that suitable directions be issued directing the concerned authority to decide the said application. 3. Mr. Sonpal, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue has no objection. 4. Accord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ication, an order has been passed and now the petitioner's registration stands revived from 1st April, 1998. We enquired from both sides as to why in terms of this order the petition cannot be allowed and to enable the authorities, particularly under the Bombay Sales Tax and the Rules made thereunder, to take note of the subsequent development and, if permissible in law, grant the necessary relief to the petitioner. 4. Mr. V.A. Sonpal, learned Special Counsel sought time to take instructions .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version