1968 (8) TMI 120

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dvocates, for the respondent.   C.B. Agarwala, Senior Advocate (O.P. Rana, Advocate, with him), for the appellant.   --------------------------------------------------   (Civil Appeal No. 1405 of 1966)   The judgment of the Court was delivered by   SHAH, J.-The respondents entered into a contract with the Union Government for the supply of parcel vans to be ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....parcel vans. The order passed by the judge (Appeals) was confirmed by the judge (Revisions), Sales Tax. At the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., the judge (Revisions) submitted the following question for opinion of the High Court: "Whether, in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, the assessee came within the meaning of the term 'dealer' under section 2(c) of the U.P....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Pradesh. Section 2(c) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (15 of 1948), defines "dealer" as meaning any person or association of persons carrying on the business of buying or selling goods in Uttar Pradesh. Sale of goods by the respondents within the State of Uttar Pradesh is not denied. But the respondents deny that they ever "carried on the business of selling goods" within the State. Normally to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Uttar Pradesh. The judge (Revisions) held that a single contract under which 36 parcel vans were assembled and supplied to the railway administration within the State of Uttar Pradesh cannot amount to carrying on the business within the State of Uttar Pradesh. With that view the High Court agreed. Mr. Agarwala on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax contended that the respondents took near....