Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (7) TMI 298

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ated 29th October, 1990, whereby the petitioner has been asked to give an enhanced security of Rs. 9 lakhs under the provisions of section 7 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner is a dealer, who is registered both under the local as well as the Central Act. The petitioner was registered in the year 1983 and, according to the petitioner, till today it has no taxable turnover under th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ment proceedings for the years 1984-85 and 1985-86, evasion of tax was seen. He further observed that the total gross turnover for the years 1986-87 to 1989-90 came to Rs. 5,47,16,007, and that the average turnover per year was Rs. 1,36,79,001. According to the Sales Tax Officer, the liability to tax came to Rs. 9,57,530 and the petitioner was, accordingly, asked to furnish additional security of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed order, the reference to the annual turnover is with regard to the sales which were local sales. Learned counsel for the respondents has admitted that right from the assessment year 1983-84 till today, the petitioner has no taxable turnover under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act. He further states that the estimate of turnover of Rs. 1,36,79,001 mentioned in the impugned order is for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assed under section 7(3A), cannot provide for a security which is in excess of the limit prescribed by section 7(3BB). The impugned order does not indicate that under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, the petitioner will be required to pay such an amount of tax which can justify an additional security of Rs. 9 lakhs. The impugned order is contrary to the provisions of section 7(3BB) an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates