TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (5) TMI 286
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ame of one B.T. Mammoo, (who has been impleaded as the third Respondent), that the said Mammoo was only a benamidar for the Petitioner and that both the Petitioner and the said Mammoo are jointly and severally liable for payment of the tax under Section 19C of the K.G.S.T. Act. The notice Ext. P-2 dated 15th February 1991 was accordingly issued to the Petitioner calling upon it and the third Respondent to show cause why they should not be so made liable under Section 19C. The Petitioner submitted its objections Ext. P-3 and filed this writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 19C. 2. The Petitioner had earlier been assessed to tax for the year 1983-84, both under the K.G.S.T. Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resh assessment that the notice Ext. P-2 was issued under Section 19C of the K.G.S.T. Act and the Petitioner replied by Ext. P-3. 3. Though the Petitioner has raised various contentious in the writ petition on the merits of the case, I am not adjudicating on the same as they are points which could be raised before the statutory authority and adjudged by him. It is not for this Court to interpose a decision when the matter is pending consideration before that authority. A decision on the merits was, in fact, very seriously opposed by the Learned Government Pleader. Sri S. Vijayan Nair, according to whom there was large sales tax evasion involved in this case; It was his submission that despite the' pompous business name of the third Res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hedule to the Constitution. I am unable, to agree. The said entry enables the States to levy taxes on the sale or purchase of goods, other than newspapers. The' power to levy. tax necessarily carries with it the power to provide for all those matters ., which are necessary for the effective implementation of the levy and to prevent evasion of tax. Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax A.I.R. 1965 S.C. 1862, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Ramkishan Srikishan Jhavar A.I.R. 1968 S.C. 59, Ganga Sugar Corporation v. State of Uttar Pradesh A.I.R 1980 S.C. 286. One of the objects of Section 19C is to prevent evasion of tax by dealers indulging in dealings in benami names i.e. transacting in the names of their nom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons at the same time, when, there is a doubt as to which among the two is liable to be assessed. Income Tax Officer v. Bachu Lal Kapoor 1967 (1) S.C. W.R. 14 Section 19C is only a statutory authorisation for such assessments. But as stated earlier, what the section really does is only to provide for assessment of the real dealer along with the ostensible dealer and that certainly is something which is within the scope of the taxing power under Entry 54 of the State list. 7. I do not therefore find any substance in the plea that the section is beyond the competence of the State legislature. 8. There was a further plea, too puerile to need reiteration (but required to be dealt with because it was argued) that a plea of benami sale is not en....