9911796707
TMI Blog1967 (3) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the provisions of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. An appeal in respect of the first two items failed. But an appeal as regards the rest of the items succeeded, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner holding that these three transactions too were of an inter-State character. But in disposing of the appeal in respect of the first two items, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner enhanced the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by him from out of State sellers. Also it is not in dispute that the assessee did not produce certificates in Form E from out of State purchasers. In such circumstances, the contention is that it is only the State of Rajasthan from which the goods moved that could at all tax the subsequent sale effected during the movement of the goods on rail and that therefore the authorities in this State will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ambit of section 6(2). If resales or subsequent sales do not fall within the ambit of section 6(2), they will attract the proviso to section 9(1). It follows, therefore, that the State which can tax them is the State from which the assessee who effected the subsequent sale obtained declarations in Form C. The first point as to jurisdiction therefore fails. The second point of the assessee is, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by reference. This is on the principle that the Legislature cannot abdicate its function. It is not necessary to elaborate the question as it has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Haji J.A. Kareem Sait v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer(1), the principle of which has been followed in D.H. Shah Co. v. The State of Madras(2). The petition is allowed in respect of the last three ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
