https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100213 Surplus cotton purchased for use in manufacturing and later sold because of excess stock and blocked capital did not, on these facts, amount to carrying on a business of selling cotton under section 2(6) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The Supreme Court treated the memorandum power to buy and sell cotton and prior isolated sales as relevant but not decisive, and held that the department failed to show a trading intention or profit motive. The impugned sales were therefore incidental disposals of raw material, not business sales, and the respondents were not dealers in cotton in respect of those sales. en-us Tue, 04 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Sep 2013 12:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100213 Surplus cotton purchased for use in manufacturing and later sold because of excess stock and blocked capital did not, on these facts, amount to carrying on a business of selling cotton under section 2(6) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The Supreme Court treated the memorandum power to buy and sell cotton and prior isolated sales as relevant but not decisive, and held that the department failed to show a trading intention or profit motive. The impugned sales were therefore incidental disposals of raw material, not business sales, and the respondents were not dealers in cotton in respect of those sales. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100213