M/S Manmohak Creations vs State Of Karnataka Finance Dept on 21 January, 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KAFENATAKA AT BANGAI.0RF_

DATED THIS THE 21%'? DAY OF JANUARY  ~ 

PRESENT

THE HOWBLE MR. JUSTICE :V'*G:'1:m§AGg)iifr§A *--7= 

AND _ %
THE HOWBLFI A’.A§§.B{}PAVl§N}%-:vV ‘V
WRIT APPEAL 13:0. 35?:?{I_f2(m_
BETWEEN: 1′ A’ ‘

M13 MARMOHAKCE-mA?:€;RS*–If V . ..
NO.1?3f2, KANCHAMI-:ALL: RUM), ..

BANNUR 571 1.f)”«!,, 5:” . ‘V
REP BYITS MAN$s’GE’R,’–.._ ,

{By

AND :

1 ‘.§STP:TE oF”i~:AaNA’mKA FINANCE DEPT
‘vzngmgza sown-5%.,’
% ‘RANGAQRE
A .. ” 1. Rifif, “£3Y’vVI’RS*:._SECRETARY

2’ ‘ ._ ‘THE As$:s?TAN’r COMMSSIONER
“QF”—COMMERCML T&XES.

R’ANg§ANAGUD. RESPOMJEMS

A v~ :Bxy;€§:é_; H K BASAVARM, GA FOR R1 TO 4;

m_,,,

THES WRIT APPEAL FILED {US 4 {}F THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT §3’RAY1N{3 TO SET ASEDE THE ORDER FASEED
EN THE WRIT PETITION NO.241?2/2000 DATED 01169/2CK}3 7

This Appeal earning an fhr Pmlimitrmry

day, V GOPMAGOWDA, ‘L, delivered the fofiowivgg : V 2. %
I %

Learned rm-tinsel #3)!’ tbs apgmVé1an€’Afi}?}s«’Tmém?;

in disamisse this appear}! as withd’i”:–1’9L-Va.

-2. Aceotdingly, the .gap;~me(;;111-;:=§i§isin.i;g..qe,:.i ;;s1m»;arawn.

 ....    *