Gujarat High Court High Court

Aquaguard vs Unknown on 18 February, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Aquaguard vs Unknown on 18 February, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi,&Nbsp;Ms Gokani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/537/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 537 of 2010
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

AQUAGUARD
PLASTICS & POLYMERS PVT LTD - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
M/S
WADIA GHANDY &CO for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 18/02/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

Counsel
for the appellant submitted that since challenge of the appellant to
imposition of penalty was not decided by the Tribunal, the appellant
does not press for reference of question 4(iii), however, with a
liberty to approach the Tribunal for necessary review/rectification
of its order. Permission as prayed for is granted.

With
respect to other two questions referred to in paragraph 4 of the
appeal, we find that same are required to be considered. Hence,
appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial
questions of law:

“4(i) Whether
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate
Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Appellant was liable to
pay purchase tax on manufacturing of sprinkler sets which were
exempted from tax under Entry No.41 of Notification under Section
49(2) of the Act?

(ii) Whether
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate
Tribunal was right in law in deleting the levy of turnover tax on the
manufacturing of sprinkler sets by the Appellant?”

(Akil
Kureshi,J)

(Ms.Sonia
Gokani,J)

srilatha

   

Top