1986 (10) TMI 311

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... facts in the case are that Faridabad Manufacturing Company, Ghaziabad, has placed an order with M/s. Shankar Cement Private Ltd., Madras, for the supply of three wagons of cement. Accordingly builty was also prepared in the name of the aforesaid Ghaziabad party. Subsequently, however, this Ghaziabad party endorsed the builty in favour of the dealer-opposite party. It is also admitted by the couns .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pposite party and the aforementioned Madras party in relation to the goods and that the said Ghaziabad party had also collected U.P. sales tax from the dealer. According to the aforesaid learned counsel the said Ghaziabad party was an "importer" under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The word "importer" has been defined under section 2(e) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act as under: "Section 2. (e) importer', i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty was transferred to the assessee-opposite party will not make the assessee-opposite party "importer" as defined under the provision of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. In my opinion, the contention raised on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax has no force. This view of mine also finds support from the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganesh Ram v. State of Madhya Prad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X