9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties and also the fact that pleadings are complete, this matter is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. The writ jurisdiction of this Court has been sought to be invoked by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the action of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation (for short GMC herein), in trying to demolish the billboards/hoardings of the petitioners and also the demand for certain amounts, which according to the petitioners, are not at all tenable in law. The petitioners are Companies registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and that their registered offices are at Kolkata and place of business, amongst others, at Guwahati in the State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trained from damaging/demolishing the billboards/hoardings. Shri D Saikia, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents on the other hand contends that the action contemplated by the GMC is in accordance with law. He submits that even if it is assumed for arguments sake that for the post GST period, the power of the GMC to levy fee for billboards/hoardings may not be there, there is no doubt that in the period prior to promulgation of the GST Act, such powers were vested with the GMC which was duly exercised and demands made. The learned Senior Counsel further contends that all the money demanded are public money and the petitioners are simply carrying on their business without making their due payments to the GMC and, therefore, the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any consideration at all. In view of such difference in the amount, it is submitted that the demand notice dated 27.04.2016 which is the foundation of the impugned order becomes non est in law. The rival submissions made by the respective counsel have been duly considered and that the materials before this Court have been carefully perused. The entire dispute appears to be one with demand of fee for two periods, namely, pre GST and post GST. Without even answering the query raised as to whether the GMC would have the authority to levy such fee for the post GST period, it is an admitted fact that certain disputes has arisen for the period prior to promulgation of the GST. While the statutory authority of GMC contends that huge sum is pendin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
