9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e import of goods by the assessee on the basis of 'actual user licences' which its Indian constituents had obtained from the Chief Controller of Imports. Those licenses, it is stated, were not transferable and the holders thereof only were entitled to import the goods. The role played by the assessee was stated to be as a mere agent on behalf of those constituents for the purpose of imports. These imports were mostly effected from the N.V. Philips Holland which was said to be an associate of the assessee there. 3.. Letters of authority were stated to have been issued by the Chief Controller of Imports authorising the assessee to effect import of the goods under those licenses on behalf of the licence holders and the assessee was to act as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... departments. Import recommendation certificates were said to be issued in favour of the assessee by the Controller of Imports. In the orders placed with the foreign suppliers by the assessee, the names of the Indian buyers were stated to be mentioned. The insurance covers were accordingly obtained by the assessee up to the Indian buyers' warehouses. 6. Both these classes of transactions were claimed by the assessee to constitute as sales in the course of import and, therefore, exempt from exigibility to sales tax. It was also urged that so far as the import of goods on the actual user's licences were concerned, the assessee merely acted as an agent." On the aforesaid facts, the dealer claimed exemption from tax both under the local l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Sales Tax v. General Trading Sales Corporation [1992] 84 STC 193 (Delhi). In that case also, against actual user's import licence issued, imports were effected by an agent on behalf of the actual user and this Court held that the said sales were in the course of import. Following the ratio of the said decision, question No. 1, referred in the present case, is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the dealer. As regards question No. 2 is concerned, the facts of this case are similar to the facts in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Gramophone Co. of India, S.T.C. No. 47 of 1978, decided on 23rd August, 1991*. It was held in that case that against orders placed by Director-General of Supplies and Disposals, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
