2019 (12) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed by the two authorities below, whereby, all the three authorities concurrently held that the Stock/ Branch Transfer of goods made by the Assessee to its branches in Bangalore and Kerala were liable to tax under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, treating them as interstate sales. The relevant portion of the impugned order passed by the learned Sales Tax Tribunal is quoted below for ready reference. 5.Point. We have considered rival submissions and also perused the connected records. It is seen from the impugned Assessment order that the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of exemption on stock transfer made by the appellants to an extent of Rs. 3,45,468/- on the ground that the appellants have not filed necessary do....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the disputed turnover of Rs. 88,017/- and Rs. 28,296/-. Hence, the levy of higher rate of tax on the above said turnover is confirmed. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner does not call for interference. 2. The Assessing Authority in the first instance while rejecting the contention of the Assessee that it was only a case of stock transfer and not inter-state sales, held that the goods were sold either on the same day, or in some cases, prior to arrival. The Assessing Authority rejected the case pleaded by the Petitioner, despite the fact that the proof for movement of goods, proof for arrival and disposal of the goods in Kerala and submission of Form "F" in suppo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee has produced before the Appellate authorities, the copies of sale pattials, invoices rendered by the agents as well as the excise gate pass. The above said documents clearly proves that the transactions are consignment sales as held by the Appellate authorities. 4. The learned counsel for the Revenue however submitted that relevant documents were not furnished by the Assessee before the Authorities and therefore, the assessment order and its confirmation by the two Appellate Authorities was justified. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the clear opinion that the present writ petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned order passed by all the three authorities concurrently deserve to be set aside. ....