SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(Raj) 676

V.K.SINGHAL
Commercial Taxes officer – Appellant
Versus
Kistoor Mal Gulab Chand – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:G.S. Bafna, Advocate.
For the Non-petitioner: None.

JUDGMENT

1. - In these three revision, filed under Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales-tax Act 1954, following 3 questions have been raised:

(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was necessary to produce declaration forms as required by Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act?

(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal rightly interpreted the notification dated 23.3.63 in holding that it was not necessary to produce the 'C' Forms?

(iii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the credit of the deposit made by the assessee could be given and whether the circular dated 1.10.1965 was applicable to the present case?

2. No one has appeared on behalf of the non-petitioners inspite of service of notice. The submission of Mr. Bafna is that Insplte of notification dated 23rd March, 1963 the person effecting sale from the state of Rajasthan in the course of inter-State trade and commerce has to furnish 'C' form and In the absence of 'C' form, he is liable to pay tax under C.S.T. Act. The Notification dated 23rd March, 1963 reads as under:

"In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (5) of S










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top