AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Acts
  • section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 :- 1 "(i)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Acts
  • section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 :- 1 "(i)
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, MUMBAI v. M/S JAYHIND INDUSTRIES LTD.

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

    SALES TAX REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2009

    IN

    REFERENCE APPLICATION NO.122 OF 2008

    WITH

    SALES TAX REFERENCE NO.3 OF 2009

    IN

    REFERENCE APPLICATION NO.123 OF 2008

    The Commissioner of Sales Tax … Applicant v/s

    M/s Jai Hind Industries Ltd. … Respondent Mr V.A. Sonpal, Special Counsel for Applicant - State. Mr P.C. Joshi with Mr Piyush Shah for Respondent.

    CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &

    B.P. COLABAWALLA JJ.

    Reserved on :- September 15, 2015 Prounounced on:- October 30, 2015

    JUDGMENT :- [Per B. P. Colabawalla, J]

    1. By these References, the First Bench of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal, Mumbai (for short, the "MSTT") has referred the following questions of law for a decision of this Court under section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 :-

    1

    "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on true and correct interpretation of Entry C-I- 29 of Part I of Schedule - C, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the non-ferrous metal castings as manufactured and sold by the respondents (original appellants) are nothing but non-ferrous metal ingots ?

    (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on true and correct interpretation of Entry C-I- 23(2), the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the non-ferrous metal castings, namely aluminium castings manufactured and sold by the respondents (original appellants) are covered by the said entry C-I- 23(2) ?"

    2. It is common ground before us that the facts and the point of law involved in these References are the same as in Sales Tax Reference No.58 of 2012. In view of our decision in Sales Tax Reference No.58 of 2012 dated 30thOctober 2015, the above questions of law are answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Respondent. The Sales Tax References are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

    (B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)

    2

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, MUMBAI v. M/S JAYHIND INDUSTRIES LTD.
    (Oct 30, 2015)