REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Sahitya Mudranalaya Private Limited Appellant

V/S

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

GUJARAT UNIVERSITY STATE OF GUJARAT PRINCIPAL ST XAVIERS COLLEGE RANCHI COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATION VS. KRISHNA RAUGANATH MUDNOLKAR:KRISHNA RAUGANATH MUDNOLKAR:KRISHNA RAUGANATH MUDNOLKAR:KRISHNA RAUGANATH MUDNOLKAR [REFERRED TO]
SOLE TRUSTEE LOK SHIKSHANA TRUST VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BRAHM DATT SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
T SHEPHARD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED VS. GIRJA SHANKAR PANT [REFERRED TO]
SPECIAL DIRECTOR VS. MOHAMMAD GHULAM GHOUSE [REFERRED TO]
MALLADI DRUGS AND PHARMA LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
P A INAMDAR VS. SATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
V C BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY VS. SHRIKANT [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR VS. DY C I T [REFERRED TO]
SHEKHAR GHOSH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. KUNISETTY SATYANARAYANA [REFERRED TO]
SIEMENS LTD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
ORYX FISHERIES PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. K SHYAM SUNDER [REFERRED TO]
DARSHAN BOARDLAM LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA THRO SECRETARY [REFERRED TO]
SECONDARY BOARD OF EDUCATION ORISSA VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIAN VS. GUWAHATI CARBON LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR. VS. SUSHIL & COMPANY [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The learned senior standing counsel waive service of notice of rule on behalf of the respective respondents forthwith. Since the controversy involved in both these petitions is the same, they were taken up for hearing together and are decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The facts of the case in Special Civil Application No. 20748 of 2018 are that the first petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the "petitioner company") is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and engaged in the business of printing. The second petitioner is a Director of the petitioner company.

(3.) Insofar as facts of Special Civil Application No. 7414 of 2019 are concerned, the first petitioner is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of transportation and provides services as a transport contractor. The petitioner firm is registered with the Service Tax Range, Mehsana Division, Commissionerate Ahmedabad-III under rent-a-cab service. The petitioners provide vehicles for conduct of state examination in the following Departments/Boards of the Government of Gujarat: (i) Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board, Gandhinagar; (ii) Gujarat Technological University, Ahmedabad; (iii) Gujarat State Examination Board; and (iv) Gujarat Council of Educational Research and Training, Gandhinagar (GCERT).

Click here to view full judgment.

SAHITYA MUDRANALAYA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address