https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156829 The Tribunal addressed whether recovery proceedings over assessed sales tax and interest involved the Supreme Court's exclusive original jurisdiction under Article 131, and held they did not because the dispute was not between the Union and a State in their constitutional capacities. It also treated a government depot selling notified goods brought into West Bengal for consideration as a dealer under section 2(b), with profit motive irrelevant, and held section 2(ccc) inapplicable to earlier assessment periods. The challenge to interest under section 8A failed because it operated as a special tax-recovery provision, and Article 285(1) gave no immunity from sales tax, which is an indirect tax on sale transactions. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:05:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156829 The Tribunal addressed whether recovery proceedings over assessed sales tax and interest involved the Supreme Court's exclusive original jurisdiction under Article 131, and held they did not because the dispute was not between the Union and a State in their constitutional capacities. It also treated a government depot selling notified goods brought into West Bengal for consideration as a dealer under section 2(b), with profit motive irrelevant, and held section 2(ccc) inapplicable to earlier assessment periods. The challenge to interest under section 8A failed because it operated as a special tax-recovery provision, and Article 285(1) gave no immunity from sales tax, which is an indirect tax on sale transactions. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 19 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156829