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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 3417

RITU BAHRI, MANISHA BATRA
Raj Tube Co. – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate; For the Appellant
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

JUDGMENT

Ritu Bahri, J. (Oral)

The instant appeal, under Section 68(2) of the PUNJAB VALUE ADDED TAX ACT , 2005, is against the order dated 30.08.2010 (Annexure A-8) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab.

2. The appellant is a dealer duly registered under the provisions of the PUNJAB VALUE ADDED TAX ACT , 2005 and the Central Sales Tax Act, having its place of business at Vishavkarma Nagar, Mandi Gobindgarh. The appellant being engaged in the business of resale of iron and steel goods, had sold iron pipes to M/s Biksons Engineering Works of Ahmednagar (Maharashtra). The purchasing dealer was duly registered under the State and Central Sales Tax Law. The goods were covered by Invoice No.407 dated 26.02.2009 amounting to Rs.4,06,504/- + CST @ 4% (Rs.16,260/-) (Annexure A-1). Those goods were also covered by G.R. No.465 dated 26.02.2009 (Annexure A-2) and the same were loaded in vehicle No. PB- 23F-1285. When the goods were on the way from Mandi Gobindgarh to Ahmed Nagar, the ETO, Mobile Wing, Patiala, detained the same under Section 51 (6) (a) of the Punjab VAT Act, 2005 on the ground that the driver of the vehicle had stated that he had loaded the entire goods from the busine

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