9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S. Radhakrishnan, CJ. Heard learned counsel appearing for both sides. 2. In this appeal under Section 78 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, following question has been raised by the appellant for our consideration: "Whether the Tribunal is justified in not allowing the claim of consignment only on the ground that the alleged declaration forms are not obtained by the consignee agents fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ission basis, and the movement of goods were not by reason of sale as the assessee had been provided with necessary declarations in Form "F" by the consignee agents. According to the assessee, disputed consignment-transaction is of ₹ 17,14,47,155/. Assessee stated that by letter dated 4th July, 2005, the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax informed the assessing authority that he had been inform ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that in good faith assessee had entered into transaction with the commission agents and he bonafide believed that the "F" Forms submitted by the consignee agents to be genuine one. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Department submitted that assessee is not innocent and he was knowing where about of the consignee agents and the misdeeds of his commission agents. 6. We ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued to the dealers referred to therein. That being the factual situation, the Forms used for transportation of the goods is found to be bogus. This is the findings of fact arrived at by the authorities. In view of this, no substantial question of law arises. This Court in its jurisdiction is not justified in re-appreciating the facts found by the authorities. Appeal stands dismissed. 7. Consequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
