https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167901 Deduction under section 3F(2)(b)(i) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act required a finding that the movement of goods from outside Uttar Pradesh was occasioned by a prior contract of sale and was inseparably linked with that sale; because the Tribunal had not recorded that core finding, its order on this issue was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh decision. Deduction under section 3F(2)(b)(vii) was disallowed because the assessee produced no documentary proof that the payment to the sub-contractor had been included in the sub-contractor's turnover, and additional material not placed before the lower authorities could not be considered in revision; that disallowance was affirmed. en-us Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Jan 2015 22:09:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167901 Deduction under section 3F(2)(b)(i) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act required a finding that the movement of goods from outside Uttar Pradesh was occasioned by a prior contract of sale and was inseparably linked with that sale; because the Tribunal had not recorded that core finding, its order on this issue was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh decision. Deduction under section 3F(2)(b)(vii) was disallowed because the assessee produced no documentary proof that the payment to the sub-contractor had been included in the sub-contractor's turnover, and additional material not placed before the lower authorities could not be considered in revision; that disallowance was affirmed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167901