TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (2) TMI 451
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax<br>BHARUCHA S.P. AND KIRPAL B.N. JJ. S.K. Dholakia, Senior Advocate (D.M. Nargolkar ang A.S. Bhasme, Advocates, with him), for the appellant. V.N. Ganpule, Senior Advocate (V.B. Joshi, Advocate, with him), for the respondents. -------------------------------------------------- ORDER In C.A. No. 1506 of 1982: Mr. V.B. Joshi states that he has f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om Sulekha Enterprises. 3.. The Sales Tax Officer disallowed the respondents' said claim for deduction upon the ground that the registration of Sulekha Enterprises had been cancelled on 20th August, 1967, with effect from 1st January, 1967, and that, therefore, on the dates on which the respondents had purchased the goods from Sulekha Enterprises, Sulekha Enterprises could not be said to be a r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffect from January, 1967 in so far as the purchases of the applicants effected from the said party prior to August 25, 1967 were concerned." 4.. The High Court answered the question in the negative and in favour of the respondents. The High Court noted that the effect of disallowing the deductions claimed by the respondents was, in substance, to tax transactions which were otherwise not taxable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lling dealer and to act upon it. Whatever may be the effect of a retrospective cancellation upon the selling dealer, it can have no effect upon any person who has acted upon the strength of a registration certificate when the registration was current. The argument on behalf of the department that it was the duty of persons dealing with registered dealers to find out whether a state of facts exists....