TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 630X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llenge the revisionary order (common in all the three writs) dated January 29, 2004, passed in Revision No. 53/2003/State/Indore and Revision No. 21/2003/Central/Indore (annexure P18) by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Indore, which in its turn arise out of the respective assessment years as mentioned in the respective assessment orders. The petitioner (a dealer) is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of what is called steel tubes, having their unit at Dewas and office at Indore. They also claim to have several branches all over India. On August 27, 1993, the flying squad of Commercial Tax Wing of State raided the business premises of the petitioner and collected/seized several incriminating documents. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be impugned by the petitioner in these petitions. Notice of these writs was issued to the respondent. They are served and represented. Return has been filed, inter alia, justifying the impugned orders including the factual finding returned by the two authorities holding the transactions to be in the nature of inter-State sales and not a mere branch transfer. Heard Shri P.M. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri A.S. Kutumble, learned Additional Advocate-General with Shri M. Parwal, penal lawyer for the respondent-State. Placing reliance on the decision reported in the case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [2004] 134 STC 473 (SC), learned counsel for the petitioner contended that both the authorities, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or branch transfer involving no element of sale is question of fact and needs to be decided on the basis of documents/material available on record. If on the basis of material available, i.e., filed by the parties or seized by the department in raid, a factual conclusion can be drawn in regard to its nature, then such finding of fact cannot be disturbed by a writ court though challenged by the assessee on facts. Coming to the facts of this case, it is not in dispute that several incriminating documents which had been seized in clear terms revealed that the goods manufactured by the petitioner at their Dewas unit were meant for specific buyers situated at different places of the State of M.P. The names of buyers were identified. Even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected by the revisionary authority in the earlier round of litigation, the same could not have been taken note of. In my considered view this submission is raised for mere argument sake involving no legal basis. Mere perusal of impugned revisionary order would indicate that each and every transaction in relation to each specific party was examined. That mentioned even the name of buyer. It is coupled with the admission of petitioner's witness Mr. Mehta (R 1). What more clinching and conclusive evidence was required for recording a finding of concluded sale (inter-State) against the petitioner. The entire object of the inquiry is to find out the true nature of transaction. It varies from case to case as to what material is relied on o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
