https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156460 Liability under section 3-D(2) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act arises only when the notified goods are sold to a purchaser other than a registered dealer and the other statutory conditions are met. Mere non-furnishing of form III-C(5) under rule 12-B(7) may justify assessment proceedings, but it does not replace the need for foundational findings that the sales were to unregistered dealers and that the statutory presumption under section 3-D(7)(b) was not rebutted. An assessment order based only on absence of the prescribed form, without recording those essential jurisdictional facts, reflects non-application of mind and cannot sustain the levy on the disputed turnover. en-us Fri, 09 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:30:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156460 Liability under section 3-D(2) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act arises only when the notified goods are sold to a purchaser other than a registered dealer and the other statutory conditions are met. Mere non-furnishing of form III-C(5) under rule 12-B(7) may justify assessment proceedings, but it does not replace the need for foundational findings that the sales were to unregistered dealers and that the statutory presumption under section 3-D(7)(b) was not rebutted. An assessment order based only on absence of the prescribed form, without recording those essential jurisdictional facts, reflects non-application of mind and cannot sustain the levy on the disputed turnover. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 09 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156460