9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (11) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05 purchased for the purpose of sending it out of the State of Haryana; and (b) If answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether the Tribunal was also justified in holding the applicant as last dealer liable to pay the tax and in upholding the levy of purchase tax on the applicant on the aforesaid cotton which was sent to and sold out of the State of Haryana." The facts found by the Tribunal in the order of reference in so far as they are relevant for the disposal of the reference are as follows: The applicant, Messrs. Ganesh Dal and Rice Mills, Ellanabad, is a registered partnership-firm and is a dealer within the expression used in the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. During the year ending 31st March, 1968, the appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch person in Haryana in respect of such business." By the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, the definition of "dealer" was altered with the effect that the words "actually delivered for the purpose of consumption in the State" were deleted. This amendment was made operative with effect from 7th September, 1955, by sub-section (3) of section 1 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. It would, therefore, be clear that at the time the relevant purchases were made the definition of "dealer" as given in the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, would be applicable; and even if the purchases were not made for the purpose of consumption in the State, the applicant-firm would be "dealer " qua these purchases. In the circumstances of this ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the petitioner-firm. At the relevant time the purchase tax could only be levied on the first purchase within the State of Haryana by a dealer liable to pay tax under the Act. On the facts found by the Tribunal it is clear that the assessee had purchased cotton from commission agents. The Tribunal was, therefore, not justified in upholding the levy of purchase tax on the assessee on the purchases of cotton which, though made in the State of Haryana, was sent out of the State of Haryana after it was ginned. The assessee was not the first purchaser and was not liable to purchase tax, as Schedule D stood at the time the purchase was made. The reference is answered accordingly. Considering the question of law involved, there is no order r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
