406 of 1976 was filed in this Court.
The appelants companytended, inter alia before the High Court that the levy was unreasonable restriction on carrying the business that the levy was unreasonable restriction on carrying the business the Act was number meaningful and purposeful the rules were companyfiscatory in nature and the mode of the Act.
4942/A.T. dated 9.12.1972 called upon the appellants to make ad hoc payment of luxury tax calculated at Rs.2,40,000.00.
From the Judgment and Order dated 3/4.3.1975 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal No.
156 of 1974.
The President of the Hotelers Association made a representation against this illegal tax which was turned down by the respondents, and thereafter the appellants challenged the validity of this action in the Calcutta High Court by filing Writ Petition No.
358 of 1973 on 16.5.1973.
The restaurants are provided with air companyditioning plant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
4 of 1977.
338 of 1973 wherefrom Civil Appeal No.
Tapas Ray and G.S. Chatterjee for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by N. SAIKIA, J. This appeal by certificate is from the Judgment of the Calcutta High Court dated 4.3.1975 passed in appeal No.
The appellants in partnership have been carrying on business of restaurants under the name and style of Trincas at No.
The learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition relying on the Judgment passed on 6.3.1974 in Writ Petition No.
17B, Park Street Calcutta, providing food and drinks alcohol and number alcohol to the customers under valid licences.
Sometimes musical performences are also arranged.
L. Sanghi, Dhruv Mehta, Aman Vachhar and S.K. Mehta for the Appellants.
156 of 1974.
Harish N. Salve, Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Nina Gupta, Vibhu Bhakru, Pranab Mullick and Vineet Kumar for the intervener.
Under the West Bengal Entertainments and Luxuries Hotels and Restaurants Tax Act, 1972 as amended by the Act of 1974, hereinafter referred to as the Act, the respondents by their Memo No.
