AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (3) TMI 453
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mehta, Advocates, for the appellant. Sanjay R. Hegde, Advocate, for the respondents. -------------------------------------------------- ORDER This appeal is against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court dated July 20, 1999, in Writ Appeal No. 2498 of 1999 in Writ Petition No. 7834 of 1994. 2.. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows: In the State ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0, the Karnataka High Court struck down these two notifications See Solidaire India Ltd. v. State of Karnataka [1994] 92 STC 278. Thus, from that date onwards, the rate of tax was again as per the Schedule to the Act, i.e., at the rate of 6 per cent. 4.. It seems that the State as well as some other dealers filed appeals before the division Bench of the Karnataka High Court. No stay was granted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioned that the appeals filed against the judgment of the High Court dated October 8, 1990 (quashing the two notifications) were dismissed on September 15/18, 1995. 7.. Reliance has been placed upon the authorities of this Court in the cases of British Physical Lab India Ltd. v. State of Karnataka See [2000] 119 STC 6 (SC). (1999) 1 SCC 170, Texmaco Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh See [2000] 11....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submissions. Ignorance of law is no excuse. Once the notifications stood quashed, the dealers were bound to collect tax at 6 per cent. Even otherwise, it is difficult to believe that parties in the trade do not know the prevailing rate of tax. 9.. The three authorities relied upon are of also no assistance. Those are cases where during the pendency of the relevant notifications, the parties we....