9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 886X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r-firm is not entitled to carry business in form F to get any benefit under the provisions of section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 in respect of exemption of payment of tax, and also for a direction to the State respondents, the sale tax authority, to issue form F to the petitioner. Heard Dr. A.K. Saraf, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. B.N. Majumder, Mr. A.K. Sharma and Mr. A. Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. C. Pal, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents. Dr. Saraf while urging for the relief sought for would contend that the present petitioner is acting as an agent of a dealer registered under the CST Act outside the State of Tripura and wants to transfer the stock of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng an order relating to the Central Sales Tax Act and ultimately taking note of entire facts of this case, the respondent-sales tax authorities were directed to provide the remaining number of form F which were not issued. In his usual fairness, Dr. Saraf further submits, there is no doubt that when a person purchased goods from another State for selling the same in the State where he is registered under the CST Act is not entitled to get the benefit of section 6A and also form F, but obviously when he is transferring the stock from principal company as an agent then the sales tax authorities are not empowered to refuse the issuance of the form F, at best they can ask for security as required under section 7(3A) of the CST Act. In the ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner himself was registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and it received goods on transfer from his principal who was outside Delhi and the petitioner was initially provided a few F form, i.e., 9 F forms though the petitioner had requested for 34 nos. of F form, on the ground that there has been large amount of local sales tax which is outstanding against the petitioner. Therefore, the aforesaid case cannot be taken up as precedent. However, so far as the submission of Dr. Saraf regarding the entitlement of form F by an agent while transferring the stock of principal staying at outside State has some force. But the application preferred by the petitioner seeking form F is not supporting the contention of Mr. Saraf, as in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
