https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155413 Exemption under the proviso to section 6(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 could not be denied merely because the H forms contained cuttings, overwritings, different inks and some unauthenticated entries. The relevant sales were made to exporters, the H forms were produced, and the bill of lading supported the claim; there was no finding that the forms were fictitious or that the alterations broke the connection between the H forms and the bill of lading. Those defects were treated as minor and not going to the root of the exemption claim, so the assessee remained entitled to exemption and rejection of the claim was unsustainable. en-us Fri, 09 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Sep 2013 12:13:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155413 Exemption under the proviso to section 6(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 could not be denied merely because the H forms contained cuttings, overwritings, different inks and some unauthenticated entries. The relevant sales were made to exporters, the H forms were produced, and the bill of lading supported the claim; there was no finding that the forms were fictitious or that the alterations broke the connection between the H forms and the bill of lading. Those defects were treated as minor and not going to the root of the exemption claim, so the assessee remained entitled to exemption and rejection of the claim was unsustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 09 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155413