M/s. SANGEETHA JEWELLERY Versus THE STATE TAX OFFICER S.G.S.T. DEPARTMENT, ADIMALI, IDUKKI, THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO TAXES, THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES CUSTOMS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NEW DELHI, THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI
GST
2019 (2) TMI 829 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-2-2019
WP(C). No. 27023 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI. AJI V. DEV SMT. O. A. NURIYA SRI. ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV
For The Respondents : GP. SMT. M. M. JASMINE. , SC SRI SREELAL WARRIER AND ASGI SRI P. VIJAYAKUMAR
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a partn
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ey are ultravires to the Constitution of India.
iv. To declare that the powers under erstwhile Entry 54 do not exist post 15.09.2017 and therefore the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act cannot be enforced after 15.09.2017 so long as the old Entry 54 has not been saved.
v. To declare that when the provisions of Constitution are inconsistent with the provisions of a statute, the provisions of Constitution will prevail over the provisions of statute and so provisions of Section 174 of the Kerala Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 to the extent to which they are in conflict with the provisions of Constitution, are bad in law.
vi. To declare that as section 19 of the Constitution Amendment Act is having supremacy over the rest of
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =