Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner, having its main place of business outside Punjab but supplying and delivering goods in Punjab, fell within the amended definition of "dealer" under the sales tax law, and whether the notices issued under the Act were without jurisdiction.
Analysis: The amended definition of "dealer" extended to a person who, in the normal course of trade, sells goods actually delivered for consumption in Punjab, even if the main place of business is outside the State. The amendment operated retrospectively from 26 January 1950. On the petitioner's own showing, goods were sold and delivered to purchasers in Punjab, bringing it within the statutory definition. The State Legislature was competent to enact such a provision under Article 286(1) of the Constitution of India read with the Explanation, and the notices under the Act were therefore not ultra vires or without jurisdiction.
Conclusion: The challenge to the notices and to the authority's jurisdiction failed, and the petition was dismissed.
Final Conclusion: The amended sales tax definition validly applied to out-of-State traders supplying goods for consumption in Punjab, and the writ petition could not succeed.
Ratio Decidendi: A trader whose goods are actually delivered for consumption within the State can be treated as a dealer under a valid retrospective sales tax amendment, even if its principal place of business lies outside the State, and notices issued on that basis are within jurisdiction.