Skip to content


K.N. Guruswamy and Co. Vs. the State of Mysore and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 6377 of 1969
Judge
Reported in[1971]27STC591(Kar)
ActsMysore Sales Tax Rules, 1957 - Rule 6(4)
AppellantK.N. Guruswamy and Co.
RespondentThe State of Mysore and anr.
Appellant AdvocateS. Shivaswamy, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateS.R. Rajasekharamurthy, High Court Government Pleader
Excerpt:
- sections 7 & 13(1)(d): [a.s. pachhapure, j] demand and acceptance of bribe proof -tahsildar demanded bribe of rs.150/- from complainant for issuing copy of layout sketch - trap arranged - next day when amount was given to accused he received the same evidence of witnesses consistent and cogent - held, conduct of accused proves implied demand and acceptance of bribe. minor discrepancies in statement of trap witness regarding demand by accused occurred due to long period of 7 years having been passed in between is immaterial. conviction of accused, proper. .....is an excise contractor has prayed for a declaration that he is entitled to the deduction of the shop rental under rule 6(4)(j) of the mysore sales tax rules, 1957, in respect of the assessment for the year ended on 30th june, 1965. the basis of the petitioner's claim is that shop rental is excise duty. in state of mysore v. d. cawasji & co. : [1971]2scr799 , the supreme court has held that shop rent paid by an excise contractor is not excise revenue. that decision follows an earlier decision of the same court in shinde brothers v. deputy commissioner, raichur, and others : [1967]1scr548b . therefore, it is clear that the shop rental is not excise duty liable to be deducted under rule 6(4)(j) of the mysore sales tax rules while determining the total taxable turnover. in that view, this.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Govinda Bhat, J.

1. The petitioner who is an excise contractor has prayed for a declaration that he is entitled to the deduction of the shop rental under rule 6(4)(j) of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules, 1957, in respect of the assessment for the year ended on 30th June, 1965. The basis of the petitioner's claim is that shop rental is excise duty. In State of Mysore v. D. Cawasji & Co. : [1971]2SCR799 , the Supreme Court has held that shop rent paid by an excise contractor is not excise revenue. That decision follows an earlier decision of the same court in Shinde Brothers v. Deputy Commissioner, Raichur, and Others : [1967]1SCR548b . Therefore, it is clear that the shop rental is not excise duty liable to be deducted under rule 6(4)(j) of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules while determining the total taxable turnover. In that view, this writ petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.

2. Petition dismissed.


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