1988 (6) TMI 309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e petitioner-assessee submitted A-2 returns disclosing a gross turnover of Rs. 3,56,504, claiming that turnover in an amount of Rs. 1,18,943.70 is exempt. The net turnover was shown at Rs. 2,37,560.50. Against the order of assessment dated 10th July, 1979, rejecting his contention, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner contending that what were sold by him were watery coco .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... em in respect of which exemption was claimed on this occasion was Rs. 1,43,767.25. The contention of the assessee was that in respect of this turnover they acted as selling agents on behalf of the principals who are horticulturists and since there is no liability on the principals, the agent is equally not liable to pay tax. This contention was also rejected on the ground that the principals on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e is liable to be taxed on the transactions in question. The Tribunal correctly observed that whether the goods in question fall under entry 5 of the Third Schedule or entry 10 of the Second Schedule, they are taxable at the point of last purchase in the State, but were rightly of the opinion that all the facts have to be gone into with a view to find out as to who the last purchaser is. We are un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X