9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the following three questions of law to this Court: (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the supplies of vanaspati effected by the assessee in favour of the Canteen Stores Department did not constitute inter-State sales but were local sales and therefore exempt from exigibility of sales tax under rule 29(iii) and (iv) of the Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the dealer was that these were local sales and were, therefore, exempt under rule 29(iii) and (iv) as framed under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as extended to Union Territory of Delhi. These provisions envisaged that sales to the Ministry of Defence of goods for official use and sales of canteen stores to Canteen Stores Department (India) were exempt from the levy of sales tax un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted as 17 DSTC 63 came to the conclusion that the sales were not in the course of inter-State trade and commerce, and secondly the dealer was entitled to the benefit of the said rule 29(iii) and (iv) of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951. Following the decision of the Essex Farms case, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the dealer. 4.. On an application being filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment dated 18th July, 1991* both the questions of law were decided in favour of the dealer, namely, Essex Farms (P.) Ltd. It was held by this Court, on an examination of the terms of contract, that the sales in question were local sales, and secondly the exemption under sub-rule (iii) of rule 29 was admissible. In arriving at this conclusion, this Court had applied the ratio of the decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
