Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the requirement in section 5(2)(a)(vd) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, for furnishing a declaration from the selling registered dealer was mandatory or only directory, and whether the assessee could be relieved from producing that declaration while proving the relevant fact by other means.
Analysis: The provision was examined in the context of the taxable turnover scheme for iron and steel sales and the corresponding rules. The Court held that, on a grammatical and contextual reading, the words requiring the dealer to "furnish" the prescribed declaration could not be treated as a compulsory condition precedent once the earlier part of the provision was understood as allowing proof that the goods were purchased from a registered dealer in West Bengal in the same form. Reading the clause so as to make the declaration requirement mandatory would distort the language and make the provision ineffective. The Court therefore treated the second limb of the clause, dealing with production of the seller's declaration, as not required to be fulfilled for the assessee to claim the benefit under the provision.
Conclusion: The declaration requirement was held not to be mandatory, and the assessee was allowed to prove the relevant fact by other permissible evidence instead of furnishing the seller's declaration.