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 sales of cotton seeds made to registered dealers against declarations in Form S.T. XXII were deductible from the taxable turnover, and whether the assessing authority could deny the deduction merely by enquiring into the subsequent use of the goods in the absence of any finding that the sales were not genuine.
Analysis: The deduction was available when the selling dealer sold the goods to registered dealers and the requisite declaration forms were furnished. The record showed that the assessing authority had accepted the sales as genuine and had not found the declarations to be false or collusive. The power to enquire into the financial position, capacity to purchase, nature and extent of business, and subsequent disposal of goods was held to be relevant only where there was doubt about the genuineness of the sale itself. In the absence of any finding of non-genuineness or collusion between the selling dealer and the purchasers, the deduction could not be denied on the footing that the purchasers might have used the cotton seeds for manufacture instead of resale.
Conclusion: The sales of cotton seeds to registered dealers on furnishing declarations in Form S.T. XXII were deductible from the taxable turnover, and the question referred was answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a selling dealer has made bona fide sales to registered dealers against the prescribed declaration and the sales are found to be genuine, the deduction cannot be disallowed merely because the purchaser may have used the goods contrary to the declaration; any action lies against the purchasing dealer.