https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150825 A commission agent selling vanaspati imported from outside Uttar Pradesh could validly be treated as an "importer" for sales tax purposes because the classification reflected a real difference and was designed to secure collection where the outside-State manufacturer could not conveniently be taxed. The levy was held consistent with Articles 301 and 304 since similar locally manufactured vanaspati was also taxed and the differential incidence did not amount to discrimination. Rule 2(d-1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules was further treated as intra vires, as it supported the charging scheme of the Act and fell within the rule-making power. en-us Thu, 09 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 May 2013 12:03:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150825 A commission agent selling vanaspati imported from outside Uttar Pradesh could validly be treated as an "importer" for sales tax purposes because the classification reflected a real difference and was designed to secure collection where the outside-State manufacturer could not conveniently be taxed. The levy was held consistent with Articles 301 and 304 since similar locally manufactured vanaspati was also taxed and the differential incidence did not amount to discrimination. Rule 2(d-1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules was further treated as intra vires, as it supported the charging scheme of the Act and fell within the rule-making power. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 09 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150825