https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150143 An unregistered dealer remained liable to tax on subsequent inter-State sales because the charging provision applied to every dealer, and the proviso referring to a registered dealer governed collection and jurisdiction rather than creating an exemption. The court also held that where the movement of goods commenced from Bihar, the State from which movement began had the substantive jurisdiction to levy and collect the tax; assessment machinery, definition clauses, or registration-based arguments could not enlarge Uttar Pradesh's jurisdiction. The assessment was quashed, recovery was restrained, and refund was directed if tax had already been realised. en-us Wed, 15 Sep 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 May 2013 13:15:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150143 An unregistered dealer remained liable to tax on subsequent inter-State sales because the charging provision applied to every dealer, and the proviso referring to a registered dealer governed collection and jurisdiction rather than creating an exemption. The court also held that where the movement of goods commenced from Bihar, the State from which movement began had the substantive jurisdiction to levy and collect the tax; assessment machinery, definition clauses, or registration-based arguments could not enlarge Uttar Pradesh's jurisdiction. The assessment was quashed, recovery was restrained, and refund was directed if tax had already been realised. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 15 Sep 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150143