9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (3) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation in form No. XXXIV specifically mentioning therein that the purchases are for resale will be adjudged guilty of violating such declaration for resale, if he has sold those very papers purchased for resale after converting them into exercise books when his registration certificate also entitled him to make purchases for manufacture?" 2.. The petitioner is a registered dealer carrying on business in mill-made paper, exercise books and other stationery articles. He became a registered dealer under the Act with effect from 1st December, 1964. As per his certificate of registration he was authorised to make purchase free of tax for resale of paper, exercise books, office stationery and printing ink. He obtained amendment of his certificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tilised by him for any other purpose, the price of the goods so purchased shall be allowed to be deducted from the gross turnover of the selling dealer but shall be included in the taxable turnover of the purchasing dealer." The question of manufacture is irrelevant while dealing with this aspect. Rightly the assessee's counsel did not address us on that aspect. The short question for consideration, therefore, is whether when a dealer purchases paper on the basis of declarations and converts such paper into exercise books and sells them as such, he commits violation of the undertaking in the declaration. Admittedly, paper and exercise books are different marketable commodities. One who looks for paper would ordinarily not be satisfied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. The Supreme Court in Maharaja Book Depot's case AIR 1979 SC 180 was concerned with the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act and the Gujarat Essential Articles Dealers' Regulation Order made under the Central Act. The Gujarat Order in serial No. 14 put paper including newsprint, paper board, straw board and exercise note books in one entry. The court was examining whether note books were beyond the purview of paper for a very different purpose. We do not think that any support is gatherable for the present purpose from that decision. We are not, therefore, inclined to take a view different from what has been taken in Rameswarlal Muralidhar v. State of Orissa (S.J.C. No. 2 of 1976) [1980] 45 STC 115 where the question directly aros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
