Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Rep. Herein By Mohana Vijay Manjre. v. State Of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary And 2 ORS.

Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 546 OF 2016 Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., having its Registered Office at C-48, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase II, New Delhi 110 020, represented herein by Mrs Mohana Vijay Manjre, aged 53 years, Indian National, Occupation service, having Maharashtra & Goa Circle Office at The Metropolitan, F.P. No.27, Survey No.21, Wakdewadi, Old Pune-Mumbai Highway, Shivajinagar, Pune-411 003. ..... Petitioner.

Versus

1) State of Goa, Through its Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Bardez, Goa.

2) The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Goa, having office at Panaji, Goa.

3) The Commercial Tax Officer, Government of Goa, Panaji, Ward, Panaji, Goa. ...... Respondents. Mr Nikhil Vaze, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms Akshata Bhatt, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the Respondents.

CORAM :

M. S. SONAK & VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.

DATE :

24th APRIL 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT :

1.

Heard Mr Vaze for the Petitioner and Ms Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the Respondents. 2.

Mr Vaze agrees that the issues raised in this Petition are the same as the issues raised in Writ Petitions No. 471/2007 and 417/2014.

3.

By a separate judgment and order dated 24/4/2023, we have disposed of Writ Petitions No. 471/2007 and 417/2014. 4.

Most of the Petitioner's contentions stand answered against the Petitioner by the Nine Member Constitution Bench decision in Jindal Stainless Limited and another vs. State of Haryana and ors. - (2017) 12 SCC 1, OCL India Ltd. vs State of Orissa and ors. - 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1518 and State of Kerala and ors. vs. Fr. William Fernandez and ors - (2021) 11 SCC 705. Similarly, the same questions, which were left open, were decided against the Petitioner in Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Limited vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. - (2019) 3 Bom CR 625.

Accordingly, by following these decisions, this Petition, will have to be dismissed.

5.

Accordingly, this Petition is liable to be dismissed and is, hereby, dismissed. Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated. The rule is discharged.

6.

There shall be no order for costs.

VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J. M. S. SONAK, J. SANTOSH S MHAMAL Date: 2023.04.28 16:10:16 +05'30'

SANTOSH S MHAMAL