TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 587X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been foisted upon the revisionist. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal as well as the assessing authority have clearly erred in proceeding on the basis that the sale was one which would stand covered within the ambit of Section 6(2) of the 1956 Act. - Decided in favor of assessee - Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. - 225 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 6-7-2016 - Hon'ble Yashwant Varma, J. For the Applicant : Alok Kumar For the Opposite Party : C.S.C. ORDER Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned Standing Counsel. Admittedly, the revisionist which is a proprietorship firm is duly registered under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. It is engaged in the purchase and sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... b-section (1A), where a sale of any goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce has either occasioned the movement of such goods from one State to another or has been effected by a transfer of documents of title to such goods during their movement from one State to another, any subsequent sale during such movement effected by a transfer of documents of title to such goods-to a registered dealer, if the goods are of the description referred to in sub-section (3) of Section 8, shall be exempt from tax under this Act; Provided that no such subsequent sale shall be exempt from tax under the sub-section unless the dealer effecting the sale furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner and within the prescribed ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere a sale of any goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce has either occasioned the movement of such goods from one State to another, a right is conferred upon the dealer to claim an exemption from tax under the 1956 Act. This however, it is contended by the learned counsel for the revisionist would be a proposition which would stand attracted only in a case where there be two dealers in two States. While not accepting this as an absolute proposition bearing in mind the fact that in the case of an inter-State sale a transaction may come about even by a mere transfer of documents of title even though the dealers may be in the same State, this Court finds this aspect need not really be relevant for consideration as the submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
