TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1973 (7) TMI 98
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the appellate authority and the matter was remitted to the assessing authority for making a fresh assessment. Thereafter, the assessing authority determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 34,84,972.10. The assessees disputed their taxability on a part of the said turnover by filing an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. That appeal having been failed the assessees went before the Tribunal. At the stage of the Tribunal the disputed turnover was Rs. 2,54,383.28. According to the assessees, this turnover represented inter-State sales and not intra-State sales as has been held by the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority. The Tribunal considered the nature of the disputed transactions in the light of the document....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is that the movement is not as a term of the contract of sale or as an incident thereto. To appreciate the above contention of the revenue it is necessary to consider the nature of the transactions so far as it could be gathered from the available documents. The assessees have not produced the relevant contracts under which the goods moved from this State to out-of-State destinations. Though the invoices refer to the contracts, the contracts are not forthcoming. The explanation given by the assessees is that all the documents have been taken by the revenue during a surprise inspection of their place of business. But, these documents have not been returned to them so far. But, on behalf of the revenue, it is said that the contracts are not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....they are not in a position to produce the contracts of sale. For that reason, we cannot reject other materials made available in this case. As already stated, the invoice and the correspondence between the assessees and the Calcutta dealers as also the C forms given by the Calcutta dealers, all indicate that the goods should have moved in pursuance of the earlier contracts of sale. The revenue has attempted to show that these documents referred to above cannot be accepted on their face value, for the correspondence between the assessees and the local dealer M/s. East Asiatic Co. Private Limited throw considerable suspicion that it is the East Asiatic Co., which should have purchased the goods from the assessees and arranged for the despatch....