Skip to content


Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Kutubali Noorjibhai and Co. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtMumbai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSales Tax Reference No. 44 of 1969
Judge
Reported in[1976]37STC432(Bom)
AppellantCommissioner of Sales Tax
RespondentKutubali Noorjibhai and Co.
Respondent AdvocateB.C. Joshi, Adv.
Excerpt:
- .....the result, we answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative.' 5. accordingly, the line 'reference answered in the negative.' at the end of the judgment should be read as 'reference answered in the affirmative.'.
Judgment:
ORDER

1. In this matter a consent precise signed by the attorneys for the applicant and the Advocate for the respondents was filed with the Prothonotary pointing out that there is a typographical mistake in the penultimate paragraph of our judgment delivered in the above reference on 20th February, 1975.

2. We find that this is an obvious typographical mistake, and the penultimate paragraph of the said judgment should have read, 'In the result, we answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative'.

3. We, therefore, correct our said judgment accordingly.

4. In the judgment at page 527, the paragraph after the 30th line from the top should be read as follows :

'In the result, we answer the question submitted to us in the affirmative.'

5. Accordingly, the line 'Reference answered in the negative.' at the end of the judgment should be read as 'Reference answered in the affirmative.'.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //