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 interference was warranted at the stage of a revision notice proposing tax proceedings, and whether the petitioner was required to prove that the sellers had actually paid sales tax.
Analysis: The notice was only at the initiation stage, and the Court declined to interfere in the proceedings at that point. It noted that the petitioner could place objections before the authority, including evidence that the purchases were from registered dealers whose identity could be established. The Court also indicated that, on the material referred to before it, the petitioner was not required to prove actual payment of sales tax by the sellers, if there was acceptable evidence of the purchases and the identity of the sellers.
Conclusion: No interference was called for at the notice stage, and the petitioner was left to pursue objections before the authority.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of without adjudicating the tax liability on merits, while preserving the petitioner's opportunity to object before the assessing authority.
Ratio Decidendi: A writ court ordinarily will not interfere at the stage of a revision or show-cause notice, and a purchaser may rely on acceptable evidence of purchases and seller identity without being compelled to prove actual remittance of tax by the sellers.