Ku.. C-^^<5-/ •-~.^",f'^]- StK^i K C»-'> r^ft^ £ 0) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Petitioners: WnLPetitionJT) Nd^2& /2010 ^- 1.M/S Aditya Enterprises, C.J. House, Rail Toly Gondia City, Gondia (M.S.) Beedileaves Dealer ^ ^M^ ^w ^^N^- ^%y ^^y \y ^^ €/^ ^<^" / 2.M/S Datten Enterprises, C.J. House, Rail Toly Gondia City, Beedileaves Dealer Gondia (M.S.) 3. M/s Minal Enterprises, C.J. House, Rail Toly Gondia City, Gondia (M.S.) Beedileaves Dealer 4. M/s Prajay Enterprises, C.J. House, Rail Toly Gondia City, Gondia (M.S.) Beedileaves Dealer /^€'ss/0^, '"'- -^ ^~~ \"<Sa''<~, All Petitioners Through their Power of Attorney Holder- Bihari Narayan Sonwane, S/o Shri Narayan Sonwane, Aged about 55 years, R/o Post Office, Rajnandgaon Distt- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) •S5es£F-^yT^-TL~-"' Versus R-espondents: State of Chhattisgarh, Throur'h the Secretary, Finance Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading & Development) Cooperative Federation Ltd., Through its Managing Director A-25 VIP Estate near VIP C!ub ^ •2-. Khamardih, Shanker Nagar, Raipur,. 3. Commissioner of commercial tax, Vikray Kar Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) WRITPETITION UNDER ARTICLE226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA t ^.•f.y J HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (T) N0. 3628 0£2QIO PETITIONERS M/s Aditya Enterprises & Others Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Basant Dewangan, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyerforthe State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 09th day of December, 2010) 1. The question arising from the facts of the instant case is asto whether the purchase of tendu leaves by the petitioners, who are registered as exporter, comes within the purview of the inter-state sale or intra-state sale. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue raised herein as aforestated has already been considered by this Court in M/s. Shyam Biri Works Ltd. v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Others and other connected matters and the present case is squarely covered by the said decision, wherein it was held that the sale was 'intra-state sale'. 3. In view of foregoing and on perusal of the documents, it appears that the issue raised herein is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in M/s. Shyam Biri Works Ltd. and, as such, the petition isdismissed accordingly. _.-^ ---------------- Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Gowri ' W.P.No.2060 of 2002 (decided on 1-10-2010)