2022 (5) TMI 642

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l No.79 of 2009 for assessment year 2002-03 under the Central Sales Tax Act, in which following questions of law have been framed:- "1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming the orders passed by the authorities below imposing the tax upon the revisionist treating the transaction being Inter-State sales? 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law and was correct to hold that the Gold Bullian Bars send by the revisionist bank to its Branch at Jaipur was not a stock transfer as such was an Inter-State sales, without recording any finding of its own? 3. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in disbelieving the material evidence and the submissions with regard to the stock transfer affected by the revisi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ale on the ground of existence of a prior order of contract. The said observation has been confirmed upto the Tribunal, which is bad in law. He, therefore, prays for allowing of revision. 5. Per contra, learned standing counsel supports the order passed by the Tribunal and prays for dismissal of the revision. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court has perused the records. 7. Admittedly, the revisionist is a nationalized bank of Government of India, which has to adhere to the policy so framed by Reserve Bank of India. It has specifically been mentioned in the grounds of appeal that the T.T. gold bars, on receipt, if not sold within ten days, the intimation has to be sent to the Head Office at Delhi for further ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v/s M/S Shekhar Tubes Pvt. Ltd, Ghaziabad reported in 1994 UPTC 104, has held that in absence of any material to show existence of prior order of contract and the movement of goods was in pursuance of those orders, the same cannot be treated as inter-State sale. This Court had observed as follows:- "2. The assessing officer did not accept the assessee's contention that the stock was transferred to Delhi and thereafter the goods were sold to various parties at Delhi. On appeal, however, the learned Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) held that sales to the extent of Rs. 13,07,989.84 paise were inter-State sales because goods to that extent were sold in the same quantity in which they were des....