https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94081 CESTAT upheld the State Tribunal's factual finding that the movement of goods from the appellant's Indapur unit (Maharashtra) to its Haridwar outlet (Uttarakhand) was occasioned by purchase orders issued by the buyer, constituting an inter-State sale under section 3(a) rather than an intra-enterprise branch transfer under section 6A. The Tribunal's conclusion relied on purchase orders, invoices, stock-transfer challans, lorry receipts and witness statements showing pre-existing contracts of sale and buyer-specific specifications; these findings were not disturbed. However, CESTAT set aside the penalty under section 29(3) MVAT Act as the show-cause procedure was deficient. Appeal allowed in part. en-us Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530 Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94081 CESTAT upheld the State Tribunal's factual finding that the movement of goods from the appellant's Indapur unit (Maharashtra) to its Haridwar outlet (Uttarakhand) was occasioned by purchase orders issued by the buyer, constituting an inter-State sale under section 3(a) rather than an intra-enterprise branch transfer under section 6A. The Tribunal's conclusion relied on purchase orders, invoices, stock-transfer challans, lorry receipts and witness statements showing pre-existing contracts of sale and buyer-specific specifications; these findings were not disturbed. However, CESTAT set aside the penalty under section 29(3) MVAT Act as the show-cause procedure was deficient. Appeal allowed in part. Highlights VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94081