2014 (5) TMI 498

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of assessment year 1993-94. The above Tax Case Revision was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- "1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the levy of purchase tax under Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act,1959 relating to the purchase of declared goods namely "iron scraps" from seller (M/s.Ragavendra Emterprises, Padi), on the basis of the cancellation of certificate of registration, (M/s.Ragavendra Enterprises, Padi) more so when the entire purchases were made prior to the date of cancellation of registration. 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in ignoring the law that the "point of taxation" relating to "declared goods" falling under Section 14 of the Central Sale....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r. He once again rejected the assessee's claim and confirmed the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under Section 7-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The first Appellate Authority pointed out that the assessee had not proved that the sellers had really effected transactions of sale of goods. In the absence of proof that the said Raghavendra Enterprises had carried on business by handling the goods in question, the transactions could not be accepted. It was further pointed out that the said Raghavendra Enterprises had only issued sale bills and had acted as bill trader. Consequently, the assessment under Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was confirmed. In respect of levy of penalty too, the first Appellate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e purchases made from Raghavendra Enterprises, the said dealer had, in fact, dealt with the goods. Referring to the contention of the assessee that the said Raghavendra Enterprises had acted as a broker in iron and steel and participated in the auction sales conducted by the Southern Railway, the Tribunal pointed out that the alleged Raghavendra Enterprises sale bill contained an entry that it was a second sale and if Raghavendra Enterprises had acted as a broker on behalf of some other dealers, the identity should be established. The contention of the assessee was Raghavendra Enterprises had arranged to send the goods from the stockyard of the Railways directly to the customers was also not substantiated. The supply of M.S. Scraps which ha....