2008 (8) TMI 856

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Trade Tax Tribunal, Gorakhpur in Second Appeal No. 252 of 1997, relevant to the assessment year 1994-95. The dealer-opposite party is coal trader. It imports coal from outside the State of U.P. and sells it inside the State of U.P. The disclosed turnover of coal was not accepted by the assessing officer. The assessing officer also took the view that the amount of freight incurred by the deale....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Tribunal was legally justified to exclude the amount of inward freight from the amount of taxable turnover of the assessee? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal has examined the case in the light of observation of honourable Allahabad High Court in Sales Tax Revision No. 340 of 1994 Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Sharma Coal Company Jalandh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6 VST 517 (All)(App); [2005] UPTC 1165 wherein it has been held that the dealer like the present dealer is not a coal agent but is a principal and as such, the inward freight shall form part of the turnover. The decision of the apex court in the case of Vinod Coal Syndicate [1989] 73 STC 317; [1988] UPTC 218 has been distinguished on the ground that in that case the dealer acted as agent which is ....