2021 (7) TMI 392

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hort), has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 30.01.2015 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The subject matter of the petition pertains to Assessment Year 2004-05. The petition was admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Whether the Tribunal was correct and justified in law in holding that the transactions corresponding to the sale of colour monitors by M/s. BPL Ltd. to the petitioner were purchases by the petitioner within the State of Karnataka, liable to purchase tax under Section 6 of the K.S.T. Act, 1957?" 2. Facts leading to filing of this petition briefly stated are that petitioner is a company incorporated under the C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re-assessment on 17.05.2010 for the year 2004-05 in terms of Section 12-A of the 1956 Act and determined the liability of the petitioner to pay purchase tax under Section 6 of the Act as well as penalty under Section 12-A(1-A) of the 1956 Act.  The petitioner thereupon preferred an appeal before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes who by an order dated 21.11.2013 dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in an appeal before the tribunal, which was dismissed by an order dated 30.01.2015. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the sales were effected by M/s BPL Ltd in favour of the petitioner an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cord. The nature of transaction in question is required to be ascertained by the authorities under the Act in order to determine whether Section 6 of the Act could be invoked to levy purchase tax on the petitioner.  The tribunal was also required to determined whether the transactions were transactions in the course of inter state sale. The Supreme Court in 'OIL INDIA LTD. VS. SUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES', (1975) 35 STC 445 (SC) has laid down the following parameters to ascertain whether the transaction is a transaction in the course of inter state sale: (1) a sale which occasions movement of goods from one State to another is a sale in the course of inter-state trade, no matter in which State the property in the goods pas....