Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly
Provisions considered
Judgment
Shri C.A. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, JJ. MARCH 26, 2008. Heard. Issue notice to the respondents. Shri Mirza, AGP waives notice for the respondents. The case of the petitioner is that he is working with Central Railways and professional tax was deducted from his salary from the year 2000. He is a physically handicapped person and as such was entitled to exemption under Section 32 of the Maharashtra State Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1975. He has made a representation to Respondent No.2 to refund the amount paid by him by way of tax under the Act. After hearing learned counsel parties, we feel that the present writ petition can be 2 disposed of finally with the directions to Respondent No.2 to dispose of the representation of petitioner within a period of four weeks from today keeping in view the mandate of Section 32 of the Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE Act. *GS.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
JUDGE JUDGE Act.
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.