9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been filed by the State under section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, for the assessment year 1986-87. The question of law referred to is as hereunder: "Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified in holding the transaction of supply of equipment, contrivances and machinery made by the opposite party, as being done in the course of inter-State sale, not liable to be taxe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certain tax was imposed on the assessee in U.P. Being aggrieved by this order the assessee filed first appeal, which was also dismissed on March 5, 1994. The assessee thereafter went in second appeal and the Tribunal by its order dated January 24, 2000 has allowed the claim of the assessee and has declared the assessee-dealer as non-assessable. The Tribunal while considering the matter has taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it would not convert the transaction of sale within U.P. In view of the fact that it was actually an inter-State sale between the parties situate at Pune and in U.P., learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on a decision of this court in the case of Santosh and Company, New Delhi v. Commissioner of Trade Tax reported in [1999] UPTC 823 in which there was a works contract concluded b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e State, such a transaction would be covered under section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and would not be subjectmatter of tax within the State of U.P. Having heard learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the assessee, I am of the opinion that in the present case the contract had already been concluded between the parties before the movement of the goods and it was clearly a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
