2018 (9) TMI 1710

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Pratiksha Agrawal I/b Vaish Associates for the petitioners Mr. V.A. Sonpal, Special Counsel a/w Ms. Jyoti Chavan, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 3 P.C. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges a Notification dated 30th March, 2016 issued by respondent no.1 - State of Maharashtra. By the impugned Notification, Entry No.82B has been inserted in Schedule C t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the VAT payable on it by other dealers under a composition scheme. 3. Mr. Venkatraman, the learned Senior Counsel in support of the petition very fairly points out that there are decisions of Madras, Delhi, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Orissa High Courts where orders were passed in the petitioners' own cases and it was held under the respective Acts that the petitioners were dealers in respec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... dealer nor is their activity in disposing of repossessed motor vehicles a sale under the MVAT Act. It is for the respondents now to issue an appropriate notice in case it does not agree with the contention of the petitioners. On such a notice being issued by the respondent, the petitioners would respond. It is only thereafter that the respondent's officers would decide the issue on the basis ....