Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2014 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 44 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxDenial of supply of form F - stock transfer to consignment agent - department claim the same as Sale liable to CST - declaration as envisaged in section 6A(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - It is apparent that full payment of the product value as advance was required to be made by the writ petitioner to the principal along with a blank form F against the indent. It is stated in no uncertain terms that the goods would only be despatched by the transport preferable to the principal, after receipt of the full payment in advance. - Held that:- whatever the suspicion that may invade the mind of the Revenue-appellants that would not give them any authority to refuse issuance of form F for making the declaration within the prescribed time to the appropriate authority in the State where the transactions claimed to be the inter-State transfer have originated from. In view of S.K.F. Ball Bearing [1960 (8) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court] as well as State of Orissa v. K.B. Saha and Sons Industries Pvt. Ltd. as reported in [2007 (4) TMI 362 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where the apex court enunciated the law regarding inter-State sale by way of the covenant, we are of the opinion that the covenant under reference in the writ petition does not accommodate any provision for inter-State sale and as such prima facie it cannot be held simply for making the payment of full value in advance that an inter-State sale has commenced before the movement of the goods/products from the State of Assam to the State of Tripura. If it appears to the Revenue in the State of Tripura that it is a foul mechanism designed by the principal and the writ petitioner to evade tax in any manner, they are not under any disability to make reference to the assessing authority as defined under section 6A(2) of the CST Act, 1956 for making necessary inquiry and to take final view on the nature of transaction. But, at no event the Revenue-appellants are authorised by law to refuse form F to the writ petitioner.
|