9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is Sri Krishna Stores, Pondicherry. The petitioner accepted the above offer by their letter dated February 11, 1994 in the following terms: "We are glad to inform that your rate of Rs. 45.10 (rupees forty-five and paise ten only) plus taxes per kg., ghee is hereby accepted. You are requested to lift 115 tonnes of ghee within a month time. You are also requested to lift the ghee as per our terms and conditions. If the ghee is not lifted within one month time our order will be cancelled." It is not in dispute that the petitioner, after the receipt of the sale consideration, arranged for the transport of the ghee tins from Tirunelveli (in Tamil Nadu) to the Union Territory of Pondicherry. The purchaser issued C forms claiming that the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the person in-charge of Venus lorry booking office and obtained statements from them. Thiru M. Mohamed stated that the consignment was not transported from Tirunelveli to Pondicherry but was unloaded at Ottanchatram in Tamil Nadu. Similarly, Thiru Sikkander Kasasi stated that the consignment was not transported to Pondicherry on revised directions given to him, and the ghee was unloaded at Ottanchatram. As regards Raja Transport an attempt made by the enforcement wing to trace such transport company became futile. But at the address given for the Raja Transport, another transport company, viz., Namakkal lorry booking office was found functioning. The person in-charge of that company stated before the enforcement wing that the ghee was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss-examination. It is clear that they want to protract the matter by avoiding the taxation on the transaction involved. Inasmuch as sufficient opportunity has been given to defend the case, the objections have been overruled and the proposals have been confirmed." Thiru K.J. Chandran, learned counsel for the petitioner, raised the following contentions. In order to attract the provisions of section 3 of the CST Act, 1956 it is not necessary that the very terms of the contract should spell out movement of goods from one State to another but it is enough if it is established that the movement is a necessary incidence of sale. He would contend that if by the very terms of the contract it is not possible to spell out a condition that inter- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
