<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1991 (5) TMI 246 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156884</link>
    <description>Survey entries in a consignment note book, standing alone, did not establish that a transport operator had engaged in purchase and sale business so as to fall within the definition of a dealer under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The material showed only dealer names and freight particulars; no stock of goods was found and no independent enquiry was made from the named dealers. The presumption under section 12-A was rebuttable, and the assessee&#039;s evidence of transportation activity sufficiently discharged the initial burden. The record therefore did not prove any sale or purchase, and the Tribunal was correct in affirming that the assessee was not liable as a dealer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:48:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (5) TMI 246 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156884</link>
      <description>Survey entries in a consignment note book, standing alone, did not establish that a transport operator had engaged in purchase and sale business so as to fall within the definition of a dealer under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The material showed only dealer names and freight particulars; no stock of goods was found and no independent enquiry was made from the named dealers. The presumption under section 12-A was rebuttable, and the assessee&#039;s evidence of transportation activity sufficiently discharged the initial burden. The record therefore did not prove any sale or purchase, and the Tribunal was correct in affirming that the assessee was not liable as a dealer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>