1976 (5) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... follows: "The accounts show that dealer has supplied sleepers worth Rs. 75,083-24 to the sleeper controller through D.F.O., Rayagada and he has not reflected the same either in his return under the C.S.T. Act or under the O.S.T. Act. Besides he purchased round logs from registered dealers giving declaration for resale in Orissa. Inspite of reselling them as logs, he converted into sized timbers and sold them in the course of inter-State trade. Thus the dealer has violated the provisions to s. 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the O.S.T. Act and that amount being Rs. 83,046-07 is added to the dealer's O.S.T. turnover." On such estimation, he determined the GTO of the dealer at Rs. 1,48,335-39. After giving rebate to the sales to registered dealers to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... counsel for the appellant produced the copy of the passing list obtained by him in respect of sleeper supply from the office of Forest Utilisation Officer, Jeypore. He also showed the advance voucher showing payment of advance to him in respect of the sleeper supplied by the D.F.O., Rayagada. The said advance vouchers show that advance was paid on behalf of the sleeper controller D.F.O. Balliguda. He filed a copy of the final bill which will show that the bill was drawn on the sleeper controller and the payment was received from the D.F.O. on behalf of the sleeper controller, Calcutta. He also produced the copy of the railway invoice which shows that the consignor was the party and the consignee is the sleeper controller. He also showed re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as Sleeper Controller, South Eastern Railways, Calcutta. The bill is also drawn in the name of the Sleeper Controller even though payments on behalf of the Sleeper Controller have been made by the D.F.O. The booking instructions and contract all show that the bookings were made under the terms of the contract by the assesee showing him as the consigner and the Sleeper Controller as the consignee. In view of that the Sleepers move from Orissa in pursuance of a contract entered into by the assessee with the Sleeper Controller and the D.F.O. only acted as the agent of the Sleeper Controller in the matter of payment for the said sleepers on behalf of the Sleeper Controller. In view of that the appellant's contention that he as effected no sale....