Skip to content


Kanpur Salt Refinery Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberW.P. No. 560 of 1976
Reported in(1978)7CTR(All)0020A
AppellantKanpur Salt Refinery
RespondentState of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Cases ReferredIn Maqsood Mohammad vs. State of U.P. and Another
Excerpt:
- - -this writ petition is directed against a notice dated 25th september 1976 directing the petitioner to deposit tax on kala namak for the first quarter of 1976-77. he was further intimated that in case he failed to deposit the tax proceeding shall be taken against him and the quarterly return shall be rejected.r. m. sahai, j. - this writ petition is directed against a notice dated 25th september 1976 directing the petitioner to deposit tax on kala namak for the first quarter of 1976-77. he was further intimated that in case he failed to deposit the tax proceeding shall be taken against him and the quarterly return shall be rejected.2. in maqsood mohammad vs. state of u.p. and another we have held that kala namak is not liable to tax under notification no. st-ii-6628/- x-1012-72 dated 1-12-1973.3. the petitioner may appear before the sales tax officer who has to decide the matter in accordance with the law declared in the above noted decision. with these observations we dismiss this petition and vacate the interim order dated 28th september 1976.
Judgment:

R. M. Sahai, J. - This writ petition is directed against a notice dated 25th September 1976 directing the Petitioner to deposit tax on Kala Namak for the first quarter of 1976-77. He was further intimated that in case he failed to deposit the tax proceeding shall be taken against him and the quarterly return shall be rejected.

2. In Maqsood Mohammad vs. State of U.P. and Another we have held that Kala Namak is not liable to tax under Notification No. ST-II-6628/- X-1012-72 dated 1-12-1973.

3. The petitioner may appear before the Sales Tax Officer who has to decide the matter in accordance with the law declared in the above noted decision. With these observations we dismiss this petition and vacate the interim order dated 28th September 1976.


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