1988 (7) TMI 401

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, at the instance of the department. The Board of Revenue has referred the following questions of law to this Court for decision: "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the consideration paid by the dealer to the Forest Department was in lieu of the sale of mahul patta to the dealer and not as licenc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, by contending that it had purchased the mahul leaves after payment of full sales tax to the Forest Department and, therefore, they were tax-paid goods. The contention of the assessee was rejected by the assessing authority as also by the first appellate authority but was upheld in second appeal by the Board of Revenue. The contention of the departm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... prohibition against sale of mahul leaves or any other forest produce to a person who had been granted a licence to (collect mahul leaves or any other forest produce. The fact that sales tax in respect of mahul leaves was realised from the assessee by the Forest Department of the State of Madhya Pradesh leads to the only inference that the sale of such leaves was effected by the Forest Department .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X