Only paid members can access this page.
Buy this Document - Rs. 500/- only - or - Subscribe Annual Package
M/s. Sejwar Traders Versus Commissioner of Commercial Tax, UP., Lucknow. - 2013 (6) TMI 576 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT - VAT and Sales Tax
......... are different to the goods mentioned in the bill of ladding and Form 39 H 39 . It means that the goods, which had been exported, were different to the goods sold by the applicant. In Form 39 H 39 the foreign buyer 39 s order number and date are not mentioned. Therefore, Form 39 H 39 filed was incomplete and inadmissible for the transaction in dispute. The copy of the order of the foreign buyer has not been produced before any of the authorities to show that the purchases by the exporter from the applicant was inextricably connected with the export and there existed a bond between the contract of sale and the actual export. Such link is missing in the present case. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the apex Court, in the case referred herein above, the sale by the applicant to the exporter cannot be said to be in the course of export under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The Tribunal has rightly held so. In the result, the revision fails and is dismissed.