2013 (6) TMI 110

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Pipes, G.P. Sheets, Coil Black Pipe, Galvanised Pipe, etc. The said company is also registered under the UP VAT Act, 2008 as well as under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. According to Entry 94 of Schedule II read with Section 4 (1) (a) of the UP VAT Act, 2008, the petitioner is liable to pay tax on Steel Tubes and Pipes @ 4% under UP Act, 2008. In the meantime, a notification dated 29.9.2008 was issued, whereby the Entry 94 has been omitted, meaning thereby the petitioner has to pay tax @ 12.5%. Thereafter, by another notification dated 15.9.2008, the Entry 94 was reinserted. Grievance of the petitioner is that from 29.9.2008 to 15.1.2009, the goods is being treated as 'unclassified' and 12.5% tax is being levied on it. Being aggrie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he tax is levied on the goods after looking to the facts of individual cases after scrutiny by the assessing authority and as such, the relief No.iii claimed by the petitioner for quashing of the orders passed in the case of another firm cannot be interfered as no order of 3rd party be quashed and as such, after arguing the matter at length, counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press the relief No.iii, which pertains to quashing of the orders passed by competent authority against M/s Bharat Pipe and Sanitary Stores. Inviting our attention towards the relief sought for by the petitioners, Mr. H.P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that in respect of relief Nos.(i) and (ii), the petitioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ement of the Fundamental Rights or where there has been a violation of the principle of natural justice or where the order or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged. In para 20 of the judgment of Whirlpool (supra), it has further been held that law as to the jurisdiction of the High Court in entertaining a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, in spite of the alternative statutory remedy, is not affected, specially in a case where the authority against whom the Writ is filed is shown to have no jurisdiction or had purported to usurp jurisdiction without any legal foundation. It is now well recognized principle that where a right or liability is created by a statute which gives a....