9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (4) TMI 784X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat well before the arrival of the shipment at Tuticorin port, the respondent had opened its office at Tuticorin and that no material had been produced about the non-availability of berth at Cochin when the ship reached Indian Ocean. - Civil Appeal No. 2255, 2256 of 1999 - - - Dated:- 10-4-2001 - BHARUCHA S.P. AND SABHARWAL Y.K. JJ. R. Mohan, Senior Advocate (T. Harish Kumar and V. Krishnamurthy, Advocates, with him), for the appellant. T.L.V. Iyer, Senior Advocate (S. Prasad, Advocate, with him), for the respondent. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the Court was delivered by Y.K. SABHARWAL, J.- The respondent, Kerala State Small Industries Development and Employment Corporati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent to Central sales tax in respect of assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84 holding that the documents had established an inter-State sale of imported cement and the respondent had attempted to camouflage the transaction in the manner aforestated. The appeals filed by the respondent were dismissed and the orders of assessment were upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The second appeals preferred by the respondent before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal were also dismissed. 2.. The aforesaid orders of the Tribunal were challenged by the respondent in two revision cases filed in the High Court. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order has set aside the orders of assessment and also the orders passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rst and second appeals. The authorities, on consideration of material on record, had recorded factual findings that the respondent had opened a branch office at Tuticorin before arrival of ships; during the period of nearly 9 months cement was unloaded at Tuticorin; sale of cement from Tuticorin was directly made to the parties in Kerala and the transactions were camouflaged to show as if cement was being sent to warehouse of respondent in Kerala. These findings have been set aside by the High Court without any material whatsoever. There was no basis for the High Court to hold that the respondent in the normal course would have transferred the entire stock of cement to its own godowns at Kerala and from there it would have delivered the cem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
