2011 (7) TMI 1034

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ganathan and S. Raveekumar For the Respondents : T.P. Manoharan, Special Government Pleader (Pondy), ORDER :- M. JAICHANDREN J.-Since, the issues involved in all the writ petitions are similar in nature, these writ petitions are taken up together and a common order is being passed. The above writ petitions had been filed praying for writs of declaration declaring the second proviso to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that a number of orders had been passed by this court, in similar matters, dismissing the writ petitions by holding that the amendment in question is valid. One of such orders had been passed by this court, on April 30, 2009, in W. P. Nos. 26676, 43880, 43881 and 3185 of 2009, (Vasanthi Agen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct 4 of 2000 is to be read along with the existing provisions of section 34 of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967. He had further submitted that a number of orders had been passed by the various Division Benches of this court holding that the amendment introduced in section 34 of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1959, is valid. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s Tax Act 1967, had been held to be valid. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned and in view of the decisions cited supra, this court is of the considered view that the amendment introduced in section 34 of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967, by the amendment Act 4 of 2000, cannot be held to be invalid. It cannot be said....