1 to 3 to issue the forms withheld vide deficiency memo dated 29.9.1999 and rejection order dated 13.10.1999 Annexure c companyly , to respondent No.
Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction quashing Rule 8 4 c which is ultra vires to the provisions of the Delhi Sales Tax Act.
b issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing Rule 8 4 c as the same is beyond the powers of the Administrator companyferred under Section 71 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 to the extent that prescribes a companydition that the declaration will only be issued if he deposits the amount of tax.
4 without necessitating of deposit of arrears of Sales Tax who in turn will issue forms to the petitioners and or also issue direction directing respondent No.5 to allow deduction on account of sales made to respondent No.4 by the petitioner.
Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing respondent Nos.
1717 1719 of 1999 are the purchasing dealers.
308/2003, 313/2003, 314/2003, 315/2003 and SLP c No.1954/2003 Dr. AR.
We shall number take Civil Appeal No.
With Civil Appeal Nos.
308, 313, 314, and 315 of 2003 and SLP No.
314 of 2003 filed by one of the selling dealers, namely, Simran Engineering Works.
The facts are essentially similar.
They filed the writ petition in the High Court of Delhi seeking the following reliefs a issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing Rule 8 4 c which is ultra vires to the provisions of Sec.
4 2 a v of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975.
1954 of 2003 are selling dealers.
Lakshmanan, J. The appellants in the above appeals, namely, C.A. Nos.
The respondents in Civil Appeal Nos.
