Allowed

Shantial Khusalbdas Co. v. State of Mah.and Ors.

Bombay HC16 Sept 2005WP/1044/1993

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, disposed of Writ Petition No. 1044 of 1993 by making the rule absolute in favor of the petitioners. The court referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment and ordered the return of the bank guarantee under specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Rule made absolute; Bank guarantee to be returned pending verification of no liquor tax collection post-interim orders.

Shantial Khusalbdas Co. Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO. 1044 OF 1993.

¶3

Shantilal Khushaldas & Co. and another.

¶4

... Petitioners.

¶5

V/s.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents.

¶7

Mr.Sanatan Panigrahy i/b. M & M. Legal Venture for the petitionrers.

¶8

Ms.Madhubala Kajle, A.G.P. for the State.

¶9

CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.

¶10

DATED : 16th September 2005.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the

¶13

petitioner and the learned A.G.P. for the State.

¶14

Both, learned Counsel for the petitioner as

¶15

well as learned A.G.P. for the State, fairly stated that a very recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Godfrey Phillips India Limited v. State of U.P. reported in 2005 (1) SCALE 465 will

¶16

squarely apply to the present matter and the same is against the revenue.

¶17

¶18

Under these circumstances, rule is made

¶19

absolute in this petition in terms of prayer clause

¶20

(a) with no order as to costs.

¶21

4.		It is needless to me	ntion that	pursuant to
the	interim	order of	this	Court, if the	pet	itioners
have	furnished	bank	guarantee,	the said		bank
guarantee	shall	be	returned	to the	pet	itioners
subject	to	verification		that the	pet	itioners
hereinabove		have not	collec	ted any amount	t	owards
luxury	tax	from the		customers after	ob	taining
interim	orders	from this	Court.	If it is	found	that
amount	of	luxury tax	has	been collected	by	the
petitioner,	then	in that	event,	it would be	open	for
the Sta	te Go	vernment to	encash	the bank g	uarantee	to
the	extent	of such		collection made	by	the
petitioner.		In that	event,	all this exe	rcise	shall

¶22

be completed by the State Government within 8 weeks

¶23

from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶24

Parties to act on an authenticated copy of

¶25

this order.

¶26

(J.P. DEVADHAR,J.)

Shantial Khusalbdas Co. v. State of Mah.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shantial Khusalbdas Co. v. State of Mah.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vidyut Metallics Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Union of India Vs M/S. Nav Maharashtra Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd.

Union of India Vs M/S. Indira Gandhi Mahila Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd.

V.G.Rana Krishnan Metal Industries. Vs the State of Maharashtra.

Subhash Chandra Tulsyan Vs State of Mah.and Ors.

The Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs Shakti Kapoor