https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103492 Purchases made in Uttar Pradesh by a commission agent for out-of-State principals, followed by prompt despatch of the goods, were treated as an integrated inter-State transaction because the movement of goods was inseparably connected with the purchase. On that basis, the State lacked power to levy purchase tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, and article 286(1) barred such taxation. Section 3-B of the Act was also held inapplicable because it applies only where a false declaration causes short collection of tax leviable under the State Act, not where the alleged evasion concerns Central sales tax. The transactions were therefore outside State taxing power and the recovery provision could not be used for Central tax liability. en-us Wed, 05 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103492 Purchases made in Uttar Pradesh by a commission agent for out-of-State principals, followed by prompt despatch of the goods, were treated as an integrated inter-State transaction because the movement of goods was inseparably connected with the purchase. On that basis, the State lacked power to levy purchase tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, and article 286(1) barred such taxation. Section 3-B of the Act was also held inapplicable because it applies only where a false declaration causes short collection of tax leviable under the State Act, not where the alleged evasion concerns Central sales tax. The transactions were therefore outside State taxing power and the recovery provision could not be used for Central tax liability. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 05 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103492