✦ Bombay High Court · 07 Aug 2009

M/s VIP Industries Ltd v. The Commissioner of Sales Tax & Anr.

Tax Application No. 14 of 2008D G KARNIK, F I REBELLO

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

The application is disposed of accordingly

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. The application is disposed of accordingly. (D.G. KARNIK, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)

Judgment

Mr. C.B. Thakkar for the applicant. Ms. Geeta Shastri, A.G.P. For the respondents. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 7TH AUGUST 2009 P.C. :

1.

The applicant is directed to make a reference to this Court on the following questions:- (1) Whether the Tribunal was correct, in law and on facts, while holding that on sales of goods to Canteen Stores Department (CSD) against declaration in Form ‘H’, under entry 1 of Group H of Schedule of Notification issued under Section 2 41 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (the Bombay Act), turnover tax u/s.9 of the Bombay Act and Surcharge under section 15-AI of the Bombay Act is not exempt and therefore the appellant is required to pay total tax @ 2.1% (i.e. Sales Tax @ 1% + turnover tax @ 1% + Surcharge @ 10% of sales tax i.e. @ 0.1%) and not @ 1% as claimed by the appellant ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was correct in law and on facts while rejecting the prayer of the applicant for remission of the interest u/s.36(3)(b) and holding that there is no case for deletion or even for remission of the interest u/s.36(3)(b), since there was no doubt in respect of extent of exemption towards turnover tax and surcharge ?

2.

The reference be forwarded to this Court within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Operative part

3.

The application is disposed of accordingly. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

(F.I. REBELLO, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The application is disposed of accordingly

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959; AI of the Bombay Act — s. 15.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 07 Aug 2009. The bench was D G KARNIK, F I REBELLO.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Tax Application No. 14 of 2008). ← Search more judgments