Skip to content


Rajendra Steel Re-rolling Mills Vs. the State of Haryana - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSales Tax Case No. 3 of 1975 and Civil Misc. No. 215-C-II/75
Judge
Reported in[1978]42STC366(P& H)
AppellantRajendra Steel Re-rolling Mills
RespondentThe State of Haryana
Appellant Advocate M.L. Puri, Adv.
Respondent Advocate Naubat Singh, D.A.G.
DispositionPetition allowed
Cases ReferredSouth Punjab Electricity Corporation Ltd. v. State of Haryana
Excerpt:
- sections 100-a [as inserted by act 22 of 2002], 110 & 104 & letters patent, 1865, clause 10: [dr. b.s. chauhan, cj, l. mohapatra & a.s. naidu, jj] letters patent appeal order of single judge of high court passed while deciding matters filed under order 43, rule1 of c.p.c., - held, after introduction of section 110a in the c.p.c., by 2002 amendment act, no letters patent appeal is maintainable against judgment/order/decree passed by a single judge of a high court. a right of appeal, even though a vested one, can be taken away by law. it is pertinent to note that section 100-a introduced by 2002 amendment of the code starts with a non obstante clause. the purpose of such clause is to give the enacting part of an overriding effect in the case of a conflict with laws mentioned with the..........to burden this judgment by reproducing those facts.4. the only question argued before us by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the question as to what exactly is the nature of a transaction, on the facts and circumstances of a case, is a question of law and that the tribunal should have referred the aforesaid question for decision of this court. in support of his contention reliance was placed on a judgment of this court in south punjab electricity corporation ltd. v. state of haryana 1972 r.l.r. 108. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that there is considerable force in the contention of the learned counsel for the.petitioner which finds full support from the judgment in south punjab electricity corporation's case 1972 r.l.r. 108. it.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Prem Chand Jain, J.

1. M/s. Rajendra Steel Re-Rolling Mills, Gurgaon, has filed this petition for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana, to draw a statement of the case and to refer the following question of law for determination of this Court:

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the goods of the value of Rs. 1,42,457.45 transferred from the branch office to the head office at Delhi could be deemed to be inter-State sales within the meaning of Section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act ?

2. On an application made by the petitioner under Section 42(1) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, the prayer for making a reference was declined by the Tribunal-vide its order dated 6th November, 1974, on the ground that no substantial legal issue or interpretation of any law was involved.

3. So far as the facts are concerned, there is no dispute and it is unnecessary to burden this judgment by reproducing those facts.

4. The only question argued before us by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the question as to what exactly is the nature of a transaction, on the facts and circumstances of a case, is a question of law and that the Tribunal should have referred the aforesaid question for decision of this Court. In support of his contention reliance was placed on a judgment of this Court in South Punjab Electricity Corporation Ltd. v. State of Haryana 1972 R.L.R. 108. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that there is considerable force in the contention of the learned counsel for the.petitioner which finds full support from the judgment in South Punjab Electricity Corporation's case 1972 R.L.R. 108. It may be observed that Mr. Naubat Singh very fairly conceded that a question of law did arise and that the Tribunal acted illegally in refusing to refer the aforesaid question for decision to this Court. Consequently, we allow this petition and direct that a statement of case be drawn up by the Sales Tax Tribunal and the following question of law be referred to this Court for decision :

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the goods of the value of Rs. 1,42,457.45 transferred from the branch office to the head office at Delhi could be deemed to be inter-State sales within the meaning of Section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act ?

5. In the circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.


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