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: (i) Whether the turnover of Rs. 7,07,740 represented stock transfer to the Delhi depot or inter-State sales; (ii) Whether the alleged export turnover of Rs. 71,040 called for interference in revision.
Issue (i): Whether the turnover of Rs. 7,07,740 represented stock transfer to the Delhi depot or inter-State sales.
Analysis: The dealer had a depot at Delhi and had sent substantial goods to that depot during the year by way of stock transfer, most of which was accepted by the authorities. In similar facts for the immediately preceding year, the corresponding turnover had been held to be stock transfer and not inter-State sales. Following that view, the nature of the disputed turnover was examined on the same footing.
Conclusion: The turnover of Rs. 7,07,740 was by way of stock transfer and not inter-State sales; this issue is decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the alleged export turnover of Rs. 71,040 called for interference in revision.
Analysis: The Tribunal had found that export of goods was not established. That finding was treated as one of fact and no ground was made out for revisional interference.
Conclusion: No interference was warranted on the export turnover issue; this issue is decided against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded only to the extent of the stock transfer turnover, while the rejection of the export claim was left undisturbed.