1951 (2) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der cancelling the requisition of the respondent, dated the 2nd August, 1950, which called upon the petitioners to re-submit return for quarters ending June, September and December, 1949, and March and June, 1950, along with treasury challans and threatened to impose penalty under Section 11(1) of the Bengal Sales Tax Act in default of compliance within 30 days and also for quashing of the said pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts in auctioning furniture and miscellaneous goods belonging to the Government of India and private parties in consideration of commission on sales, and so it is not a dealer. On the 30th May, 1950, the petitioners applied to the Com- missioner of Commercial Taxes, under Section 18 of the Act for determi- nation of certain questions and in particular the question whether the petitioners' firm i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itioners thereupon moved this Court on the 1st September, 1950, and obtained a rule nisi. It is this rule which has now come up for hearing before me. It is contended that an auctioneer is not a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Bengal Sales Tax Act and it is argued with reference to Sections 2(g), (h) and (i) and Sections 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 (3), 11 and 13 of the Act and the Forms in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tax is imposed. It is therefore immaterial whether the auctioneer is the owner of the goods or not. I have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the petitioners are dealers within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act. It was contended that the petitioners had no remedy open under the Act after the repeal of Section 18 of the Act and this application is there- fore properly made. I am....