TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (7) TMI 631
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t year 1981-82 (Central). The applicant is a dealer and manufacturer of watches. The department for the assessment year 1981-82 has rejected the certain claims of the dealer with respect to the stock transfer. The applicant before the assessing authority claimed that it is manufacturing watches for the last 4-5 years. All the sales are effected through the Head Office situate at Delhi. The watche....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on October 17, 2003. Elaborating the argument he submitted that the aforesaid judgment also covers the controversy involved in the present case. In contra the learned Standing Counsel submitted that each transaction of stock transfer should be examined on its fact. The finding recorded by the Tribunal in the present case rejecting the claim of stock transfer is a finding of fact. In Sales Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regular course of business from factory to Delhi Head Office and thereafter, it was sold from Delhi Head Office to the various parties including M/s. Parikh Watch Company, Bombay. It was open to the Delhi Head Office on the receipt of the goods to sell to M/s. Parikh Watch Company, Bombay, or to any other party or the to deal with the goods as per their own choice. Merely because, there was no st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d a file vide Sanket Nos. 1 and 2 and the correspondences in between the dealer with M/s. Shifco Ltd., Bombay, and has come to the conclusion that Shifco Brand watches were manufactured by the dealer in pursuance of the earlier order by M/s. Shifco Ltd., and the transfer of watches to Head Office was in pursuance of the purchase orders. This finding of fact has been confirmed by the Tribunal. The ....