TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (5) TMI 356
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s against the order dated June 5, 1986 passed by the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal in a second appeal. The dealer had preferred the second appeal challenging the imposition of certain levies by the subordinate authorities. The items which are under challenge in this revision alone need to be mentioned. The dealer's contention having failed before the Tribunal the challenge is reiterated in this r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....usiness, it fall within the amended definition of "business" in the Act. This contention of the dealer is, therefore, rejected. The next contention in support of this revision is that interest levied under section 11-B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 read with section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on delayed payment of tax is untenable. This point also stands concluded by a decisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble turnover of the dealer. I find that the necessary facts on the basis of which this point arises relating to the charges under these heads are neither mentioned by the Tribunal in its order nor considered in that light. It is obvious that the actual nature of transactions and the circumstances in which these charges were incurred by the dealer as well as the basis on which exclusion of that amo....