TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the revising authority was justified in remanding the matter for a finding on the popular and commercial meaning of "Jaughat" and its common use; (ii) whether exemption from tax on sales to registered dealers under Section 3-D(2) could be denied merely because Form III-C(2) was not filed, notwithstanding other evidence of sale to registered dealers.
Issue (i): whether the revising authority was justified in remanding the matter for a finding on the popular and commercial meaning of "Jaughat" and its common use.
Analysis: The relevant inquiry was not whether the article was in fact used as cattle fodder by horses or cows, but how it was understood in commercial or popular sense. The revising authority therefore acted correctly in directing the assessing authority to determine its common use.
Conclusion: The remand on this issue was upheld.
Issue (ii): whether exemption from tax on sales to registered dealers under Section 3-D(2) could be denied merely because Form III-C(2) was not filed, notwithstanding other evidence of sale to registered dealers.
Analysis: Section 3-D(7)(b) deems every sale to be a sale to a person other than a registered dealer unless the dealer proves otherwise to the satisfaction of the assessing authority after furnishing the prescribed declaration or certificate. The filing of the form was treated as a mode of proof and a procedural , not the exclusive means of establishing the sale. The dealer could therefore rely on other evidence to satisfy the assessing authority that the purchaser was a registered dealer.
Conclusion: Non-filing of Form III-C(2) did not by itself disentitle the assessee to exemption if the sale to a registered dealer was otherwise proved.
Final Conclusion: The revision was dismissed, and the assessee's challenge to the adverse tax treatment failed, though the assessing authority was directed to consider other evidence on remand while applying the statutory requirement.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing provision requires proof to the satisfaction of the assessing authority, prescribed forms may be a recognised mode of proof but do not necessarily constitute the sole or mandatory method unless the statute clearly says so.
TaxTMI 
