1964 (6) TMI 50

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her items of goods. But the Supreme Court in State of Madras v. Noor Mohamed & Co. [1960] 11 S.T.C. 570. overruled the decision of this Court in Noor Mohamed & Co. v. State of Madras[1956] 7 S.T.C. 792. and held that unlicensed dealers in hides and skins were also liable to pay sales tax. Relying on this decision the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer suo motu took steps for revising the assessment and assessed the petitioners' sales in hides and skins. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners presses his claim only in regard to a turnover of Rs. 39,000 and odd in respect of which the assessees claimed exemption on the footing that they represented sales in the course of export effected through Messrs Best & Co., as exporting a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the year to which they related. Sri Chandrasekhara Sastry urged that since more than five years had elapsed from the year of assessment, the loss of the relevant contracts should be considered to have been accidental and not a wilful suppression of a relevant document or accounts by the assessees, and that no adverse inference should be drawn against them regarding the nature of the contract with Best & Co. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the Government relied on the observation of the Tribunal that Messrs Best & Co. had functioned also as purchasers from other dealers. It is not the case of the Government that Messrs Best & Co. in their relationship with the assessees functioned also as purchasers in the case of some transactio....