GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (1) TMI 140 - PATNA HIGH COURT

2016 (1) TMI 140 - PATNA HIGH COURT - TMI - Whether the revenue authorities could treat the transaction in question to be that of inter-State sale when a branch office of Lucky Laboratories is said to have obtained the goods from Ghaziabad and has claimed to have sold the goods to the appellant within the State of Bihar - Held that:- Question of mandatory provision of Section 11 of the Act raised on behalf of the appellant has been considered in detail with reference to the earlier decisions of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unal did not overlook the mandatory provision of Section 11 of the Act and has rightly opined that if M/s. Lucky Laboratories Ltd. had paid any tax treating its transaction as inter-State transaction it can seek redressal in proper forum according to law. - A review by its very nature has a limited scope and it is not that the reviewing authority sits in appeal over the order passed earlier. - fresh substantial question of law sought to be raised by the appellant has any substance in it. - Decid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of law raised on behalf of the appellant is whether the revenue authorities could treat the transaction in question to be that of inter-State sale when a branch office of Lucky Laboratories is said to have obtained the goods from Ghaziabad and has claimed to have sold the goods to the appellant within the State of Bihar. 3. While admitting the appeal, it was observed that the decision on the appeal would be subject to the decision on the preliminary objection raised by the State that no appeal i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t done. 5. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the State did not press the aforesaid preliminary objection but it was submitted by him that the substantial question of law raised on behalf of the appellant on the basis of which the appeal has been admitted for hearing does not at all arise in the present matter and the present appeal does not involve such question. 6. It is the stand of learned counsel for the State that the appeal has not been filed against the origina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in preferred a second review application against the order dated 7.9.1999, which has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 3.6.2005. It is, thus, submitted that it is not open in the present appeal to the appellant to take any ground which pertains to the order dated 1.3.1995 passed in revision, rather the petitioner must satisfy this Court regarding any substantial question of law which arises out of the order dated 3.6.2005 passed in the second review application for review of the order d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version