TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1295X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arnataka High Court. The view taken by the Karnataka High Court, relied upon by the Tribunal stands affirmed by the honourable Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. Azad Coach Builders Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (9) TMI 879 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. No question of law arises which may require adjudication by this court. Appeal dismissed. - S.T.C. No. 3 of 2010 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 6-1-2011 - ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND AJAY KUMAR MITTAL JJ. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Additional Advocate-General, Haryana, for the petitioner JUDGMENT This petition has been filed under section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with section 42(2) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 seeking direction to the Haryana Tax Tribunal to refer for opinion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TST) cited before it on the behalf of the State? (v) Whether the Tribunal has failed to follow the judgment of the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Hari Om Industry v. State of Haryana reported as [2001] 123 STC 155 (P H); 16 PHT 209 wherein it has been held by the honourable High Court that the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana, can take different view on merits in another year of the same assessee? (vi) Whether the Tribunal was justified in brushing aside the reliance on judgments in K.A.K. Anwar Co. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1998] 108 STC 258 (SC) and Srinivas Leather Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [2000] 119 STC 369 (TNTST) without assigning any reason? The assessee executed the work of fabrication for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her the transaction in question is covered by section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Or not.'? The case is fully covered by the judgment of honourable Karnataka High Court passed in the case of Azad Coach Builders Pvt. Limited v. State of Karnataka reported as [2001] 123 STC 473 (Karn) where it has clearly been held that (page 487 in 123 STC): 'In the present matter it is not even the case of implied contract but of the specific contract which has been entered into by the exporter with the foreign buyer to export the bus having the chassis and body of definite specification and thus all the conditions of section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act have been fulfilled. It is not in dispute that at the time when the orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned counsel for the petitioner is unable to dispute that against earlier order of the Tribunal, which has been followed in the present case, the State did not take any remedy. He is also unable to dispute the applicability of the said judgment. His only contention is that the goods covered by the transaction penultimate to export should be of the same goods which are exported. There is no merit in the submission. In the present case, it has been specifically held by the Assessing Authority as well as by the Tribunal that the assessee had produced the relevant information in prescribed form in support of its claim. Once transaction between the assessee and the exporter was integrated to the export, section 5(3) was rightly held to be attrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
