Civil Appeal No. 206 of 1952. Case: Himmatlal Harilal Mehta Vs State of M.P. and others. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Civil Appeal No. 206 of 1952 |
| Judges | Mahajan, C.J.I., B.K. Mukherjea, S.R. Das, Bose And Ghulam Hasan, JJ. |
| Issue | Sales Tax |
| Citation | AIR 1954 SC 403 |
| Judgement Date | March 16, 1954 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
Mahajan, C.J.I.
-
This is an appeal by leave from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur dated 25-4-1952 dismissing a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the appellant questioning the 'vires' of certain provisions of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947.
-
The appellant represents a concern C. Parakh and Company (India) Limited, a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, having its head office at Bombay, and several branches in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The main business of the appellant company is that of cotton.
The head-office of the appellant at Bombay sells cotton bales to several mills and individuals under the control and the system regulated by the Textile Commissioner at Bombay, and upon a contract of sale being completed the goods after being ginned and pressed are sent from Khamgaon and other places in the State of Madhya Pradesh and are actually delivered in Bombay and such other places outside the State of Madhya Pradesh as directed by the head office. The cotton bales are sent by rail under an insurance in favour of the appellant, and are delivered to the buyer by tender of railway receipt against the payment of price in Bombay.
-
Under the central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Act 21 of 1947), cotton was declared liable to sales tax on 11-4-1949, and since that date the appellant commenced paying the tax in respect of the purchases made by it, and continued to pay it till 31-12-1950. For the quarter ending on 31-3-1951 the appellant declined to pay the tax in respect of the purchases made during that quaterr, realizing that it could not be made legally liable for the payment of this tax in the State of Madhya Pradesh, the transactions done or effected in Madhya Pradesh not being "sales" within that State.
Apprehending that the Company may be subjected to the payment of the tax without authority of law, an application was preferred in the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur praying for an appropriate writ or writs which may secure to the Company protection from the impugned Act and its enforcement by the State. It was alleged that Explanation II to section 2(g) of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 as further amended by Act 16 of 1949 was 'ultra vires' and illegal.
-
This petition, along with a Reference in another case) Misc, Civil Case No. 258 of 1951: - 'Sir Ram Gulabdas v. Board of Revenue', AIR 1952 Nag 378 (A), was heard by a Division Bench of the Nagpur High Court and it was held that Explanation II to section 2(g) of the Act was not enforceable because under the Constitution sales tax could only be collected in the State where the goods were delivered for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Writ Petition No. 672 of 2015. Case: Life Cell International (P.) Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.. High Court of Madras (India)
......The petitioner and others who are engaged in the stem cell banking business ... High Court is barred even for statutory appeal arising out of CESTAT orders, relating, among ...Versus State of Gujarat" reported in AIR 1979 SC 180; and ... of Bihar, reported in (2005) 3 SCC 73; "Himmatlal Harilal Mehta versus State of M.P." reported in ... to refer the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in "K.S. Paripoornan versus State ......
-
Civil Misc. Writ. Appln. No.9 of 1956. Case: Kartick Kumar Bhattacharjee Vs B. N. S. Barathakur.
......226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate Writ commanding the ... 1953-54 and 1954-55 (account period 1-4-1952 to 31-3-1953 and 1-4-1953 to 31-3-1954) was ... filed by respondent for adjournment in this Court it was not disclosed that the record of these ...It is not necessary to state in detail all this, but it appears that there was ... the Act provides for appearances through others and the question of what authority Goswami had, ...(2) Himmatlal Harilal Mehta v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR ... Act, and when he has already preferred an appeal, as in this case, the High Court Will not act ......
-
C.O. 8377(W) of 1993. Case: Md. Rashid Khan Vs State of W.B.. High Court of Calcutta (India)
...be made in this connection to the judgment and decision in the case of Himmatlal Hiralal Mehta v. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in AIR 1954 SC 403 at page 406. It is also well settled that when the validity of the Act which provides the alternative remedy is itself under challenge, (as ......
-
A.S.T. No. 283 Of 2002. Case: Uniworth Textiles Ltd. Vs Joint Development Commissioner, Seepz. High Court of Calcutta (India)
...Amount, Which Is Not Beyond 6 Months. 9.1the Apex Court Had Held In Himmatlal Harilal Mehta V. State Of Madhya Pradesh & Others, Air 1954 Sc 403, That In Case Where Alternative Remedy Is Onerous Namely Which Requires Pre-Deposit Of The Amount And If The Amount Is Not Deposited, The Rem......
-
A.S.T. No. 283 Of 2002. Case: Uniworth Textiles Ltd. Vs Joint Development Commissioner, Seepz. High Court of Calcutta (India)
...Amount, Which Is Not Beyond 6 Months. 9.1the Apex Court Had Held In Himmatlal Harilal Mehta V. State Of Madhya Pradesh & Others, Air 1954 Sc 403, That In Case Where Alternative Remedy Is Onerous Namely Which Requires Pre-Deposit Of The Amount And If The Amount Is Not Deposited, The Rem......
-
Writ Appeal No. 629 of 2007. Case: Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, UOI and Commissioner of Service Tax. High Court of Karnataka (India)
...the learned counsel for the Appellant-Assessee has placed strong reliance on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1954 SC 403 (Himmatlal Harilal Mehta vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others) and (2001) 9 SCC 275 (J.M. Baxi and Co., Gujarath vs. Commissioner of Customs, New......
-
W.A. No. 957 of 2015. Case: V. Kanakarajan Vs Ramanathan and Ors.. High Court of Madras (India)
...the present is an example of the exceptional situation above contemplated just as Himmat Lal V. State of Madhya Pradesh [1954 SCR 1122 (AIR 1954 SC 403) was another instance which came before this (iii) U.P. Junior Doctors' Action committee V. Dr.B.Sheetal Nandwani and others reported in AI......
-
A.P.O. No. 467 of 2012, W.P. No. 298 of 2012. Case: Narbada Devi Harlalka Vs Kolkata Municipal Corporation. High Court of Calcutta (India)
...Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Himmatlal Harilal Mehta v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, reported in AIR 1954 SC 403 followed the earlier decision of the Supreme Court, reported in AIR 1953 SC 252 [The State of Bombay and Anr. v. The United Motors (India) Ltd. a......