<?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>2014 (10) TMI 640 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252506</link>
    <description>For a stock transfer claim under Section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, the dealer must prove that the movement of goods was otherwise than by sale by producing prescribed Form F obtained from the prescribed authority, along with evidence of despatch. Where the department shows that the Forms F were not issued to the declared agents and the dealer fails to establish lawful procurement, the declarations are not valid merely because they were produced. The authorities may examine whether the statutory conditions for stock transfer are satisfied, and the Tribunal&#039;s remand for further enquiry was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367416" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 640 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252506</link>
      <description>For a stock transfer claim under Section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, the dealer must prove that the movement of goods was otherwise than by sale by producing prescribed Form F obtained from the prescribed authority, along with evidence of despatch. Where the department shows that the Forms F were not issued to the declared agents and the dealer fails to establish lawful procurement, the declarations are not valid merely because they were produced. The authorities may examine whether the statutory conditions for stock transfer are satisfied, and the Tribunal&#039;s remand for further enquiry was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252506</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>