9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod 2001-02. 2. By the impugned order the Tribunal affirmed the order dated 18th November, 2005 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (ACST), Cuttack Range-II, Cuttack in Appeal No.AA 498/CUII of 2004-05. The ACST had dismissed the Assessee's appeal against the assessment order passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack II Circle, Cuttack (STO) for the aforementioned period. 3. Admit. The following questions of law are framed for consideration by this Court: "(a) Whether sale of size wood by the petitioner against declaration Form IV amounting to Rs.12,07,731.00 to a registered dealer namely M/s. Mayur Electronics Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. will not be eligible to concessional rate of tax @ 4% under Entry 81 of List C of the Schedule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2005 dismissed the appeal. It was concluded that the selling dealer was not entitled to sell the packing materials for sale against Form IV since they stood excluded from that benefit with effect from 1st April, 2001. This order was concurred with by the Tribunal by the impugned order. The Tribunal noted that the "Appellant did not dispute" that the goods intended to be used as packing materials were excluded from the concessional rate of tax with effect from 1st April, 2001. 6. This Court has heard the submissions of Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. S.K. Pradhan, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Opposite Party (Department). 7. The declaration in Form IV furnished by the purchasing deal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d not the selling dealer. 9. Applying the ratio of the above decision to the case on hand, it is seen that the declaration in Form IV does not disclose the intention of the purchasing dealer to use the size goods purchased as 'packing materials'. Consequently, the selling dealer cannot be saddled with any liability of tax. If indeed, the Department finds that the purchasing dealer has used the purchased goods for the purpose other than that disclosed in the declaration form, it would be open to the Department to proceed against the purchasing dealer. It is, therefore, not justified on the part of the Department to pass on that liability to the selling dealer. 10. For the aforementioned reasons, the questions are answered in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
