1970 (10) TMI 59

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e petitioner is a firm of excise contractors. The said firm paid health cess on shop rental. The said levy was challenged by the petitioner, among others, by a writ petition filed before this court. Against the decision of this court, the petitioner preferred C.A. No. 1595 of 1966 to the Supreme Court of India, who allowed the appeal and issued a mandamus directing the respondents to the said appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... petitioner. The petitioners submitted their objections wherein they contended that they are not liable for the sales tax assessed on the subcontractors. An oral hearing was given to the petitioner's counsel. After hearing, the respondent-the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes-made the impugned order dated 20th October, 1967, by which he overruled the objections of the petitioner and ordered that a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x Act, 1957. His powers are as provided under the said Act. The Mysore Sales Tax Act confers no jurisdiction on the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to adjust the sales tax due from an assessee towards the amount refundable to another person by the Government. The learned Government Pleader has not shown us any statutory provision which empowers the respondent to make the impugned order. It was su....