Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The SC held that the appellant's sale of goods to the State warehouse constituted an entry of goods into the local area under Sections 3(1), 2(1)(aa), 2(1)(b), and 2(3) of the M.P. Entry Tax Act, 1976, thereby attracting entry tax liability. The Court rejected the appellant's argument that the State warehouse's status as a dealer negated their liability, affirming that two independent transactions occurred: one between the manufacturer and the warehouse, and another between the warehouse and retailers. The role of the State warehouse was not merely supervisory; it purchased goods from the manufacturer, occasioning the entry tax. The Court further clarified that the presence of an intermediary does not render the sale inseverable unless a direct and inseparable link exists. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, confirming the validity of the State's demand for entry tax payment by the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.