9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (3) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... withdrawn.) (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the dealer is entitled to claim the deduction in respect of the sales of Rs. 2,28,123 as sales to registered dealer for resale when the sales have been effected to M/s. Kotak Co., Sarafa, Ujjain, after 25th August, 1958, when the order for registration was passed and before the date of actual issuance of the certificate, i.e., 8th September, 1958?" 2.. The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows: The assessee is a registered dealer and was carrying on business in cotton at the material time. The period of assessment is from 1st April, 1958, to 31st March, 1959. For that period, tax amounting to Rs. 6,724.24 was assessed by the Addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring an endorsement that the registration was to be effective from 15th August, 1958. It is also not disputed that if on the date when the sale was made M/s. Kotak Co. was a registered dealer, then the assessee was entitled to claim deduction in respect of that sale. The short question for consideration, therefore, is whether the sale made by the assessee to M/s. Kotak Co. should be held to be a transaction with a registered dealer. 5.. Now, the material provisions of section 6 of the Act, which deal with licensing and registration of dealers, are as follows: "6. (1) No manufacturer or importer of goods shall, while being liable to tax under this Act, carry on business as a dealer unless he has taken a licence on payment of the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act, 1948, the Supreme Court held in Assessing Authority v. Patiala Biscuits Mfrs. P. Ltd.[1977] 39 S.T.C. 381 (S.C.). that a dealer, who had applied for registration under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, and to whom registration was granted by the officer with effect from the date of application, must be treated as a registered dealer possessing a registration certificate during the period when his application for registration was pending with the officer. The learned counsel for the department conceded that in view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court it must be held that the sales made to M/s. Kotak Co. on 31st August, 1958, were sales to a registered dealer. 6.. Consequently, our answer to the second question ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
