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 a railway container contractor, who fails to disclose the name and complete address of the consignor or consignee and does not maintain the records required by the rules, can be treated as a dealer for the purposes of levy of tax under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008.
Analysis: Section 2(h)(ix) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 specifically includes a railway container contractor within the definition of dealer where the contractor fails to disclose the required particulars of consignor or consignee. Rule 38(7) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Rules, 2008 imposes a positive obligation to maintain prescribed registers and copies of transport documents in respect of consignments received for transportation or storage. The statutory scheme was held to be specific and self-contained for railway container contractors, and the tribunal had erred in ignoring the rule-based record-keeping requirement. The absence of possession of goods was held immaterial once movement of consignments through the contractor was established and the statutory obligation to maintain and furnish records was not complied with.
Conclusion: The contractor is required to obtain registration and maintain the prescribed records, and on failure to do so, can be treated as a dealer liable to tax under the Act.