Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2022 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 642 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxLevy of Tax - Inter-State sales - whether Gold Bullian Bars send by the revisionist bank to its Branch at Jaipur was not a stock transfer as such was an Inter-State sales, without recording any finding of its own? - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the revisionist is a nationalized bank of Government of India, which has to adhere to the policy so framed by Reserve Bank of India. It has specifically been mentioned in the grounds of appeal that the T.T. gold bars, on receipt, if not sold within ten days, the intimation has to be sent to the Head Office at Delhi for further instructions. Upon receiving the instructions, the goods were sent to Jaipur Branch. The said transfer was treated as central sales under the Central Sales Tax Act. On submission of Form-F, the assessing authority has treated the stock transfer as inter-State sale, on perusal of the stock register maintained by the revisionist Branch office at Jaipur, that the goods were sold to one party namely R.P. Gatta Jewelers and there was a pre-existing contract, but the revisionist failed to bring on record any other material to prove otherwise - The Tribunal being the last court of fact has failed to consider the fact that the revisionist is a nationalized bank and the nature of transaction is not a regular transaction. The revisionist has sent the gold bars as stock transfer to be sold at Jaipur. The Department has failed to bring on record any contract or pre-existing order of any of the parties at Jaipur. Merely the goods have been sold to one party namely R.P. Gatta Jewelers cannot be a ground for presuming that there was a pre-existing contract. The Department has miserably failed to bring on record any material, whatsoever, except the disclosure by way of showing the stock register maintained at Jaipur Branch. Merely goods have been sold on the date of receipt or within 2- 3 days of receipt at the branch cannot be a ground for treating the pre-existing contract in existence of prior order of contract. In absence of material on record with regard to existence of prior order of contract and the movement of goods to Jaipur Branch was in pursuance of those orders, the same cannot be treated as inter-State sale - this revision is allowed.
|