Marble Men Through Its Partner Sri M.K. ... vs Commissioner, Trade Tax on 9 November, 2004
In the case of National Carbon Company v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., reported in AIR, 1969 Alld., 205 goods was admittedly transported to Nepal.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.40 seconds)The Commissioner, Trade Tax vs Rajendra And Company on 20 May, 2005
" 4- This passage has been relied by learned counsel for both parties. The learned counsel for assessee emphasized on the observations, such a transaction without more cannot be regarded as one in the course export and urged that ratio of this case did not apply as there was more in this case which resulted in making the sale "in course of export". The learned counsel argued that in National Carbon Company v. Commission of Sales Tax, 23 STC 388 it was held by a Full Bench of this Court:
Commissioner Of Trade Tax vs Rajesh Spices Company on 30 April, 2004
This passage has been relied by learned Counsel for both parties. The learned Counsel for assessee emphasised on the observation, 'such a transaction without more cannot be regarded as one in the course of export' and urged the ratio of this case did not apply as there was 'more' in this case which resulted in making the sale 'in course of export'. The learned Counsel argued that in National Carbon Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. [1969] 23 STC 388 it was held by a Full Bench of this court:
Gupta Brothers vs Commissioner, Sales Tax on 8 December, 1969
17. As already stated above, the expression "the sale as a direct result of which the goods are imported" has the same meaning as "the sale which occasions the import". Therefore, the ratio of the cases referred to above would apply with equal force for the determination of the question involved in the instant case.
Commissioner Of Sales Tax vs Ganeshi Lal And Sons on 24 December, 1980
5. This passage has been relied on by the learned counsel for both parties. The learned counsel for the assessee emphasised on the observation, "such a transaction without more cannot be regarded as one in the course of export" and urged the ratio of this case did not apply as there was "more" in this case which resulted in making the sale "in the course of export". The learned counsel argued that in National Carbon Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1969] 23 STC 388 (FB) it was held by a Full Bench of this Court :
Mascot Footcare Ghaziabad vs Commissioner, Trade Tax U.P. Lkw. on 8 September, 2011
He submits that the High Court in the aforesaid judgments has held that merely because the required Form-31 accompanying the transaction was found to be completely blank, it by itself cannot be a ground to levy penalty under Section 15-A(1)(o) in absence of a finding that same had been done with the intention to evade the tax. For the purpose he has also placed reliance upon the findings which have been recorded in the assessment order.
Commissioner, Sales Tax vs Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. And Anr. on 30 October, 1968
9. A similar question came up for decision before a Full Bench of this court in National Carbon Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax,
U.P. 1968 A.L.J. 497 That was a case of sales to dealers in Nepal. There also the stocks were booked by rail to a railway terminus within the Indian territory and there also the delivery of goods was taken by the Nepal buyers at the railway terminus near the Indian Nepal border but within the Indian territory for want of direct rail link between India and Nepal. In that case also the goods were taken to Nepal by the buyers through other means of transport. This court on a consideration of all the circumstances held that the sales were exempt as being sales made in the course of export. The facts in the instant case are almost similar to the facts of that case. There also the sales tax authorities had denied the exemption to the assessee on the ground that the delivery of goods had been made to foreign buyers with in the Indian territory. This court held that that fact did not alter the legal position. It was immaterial as to where the property in the goods passed so long as the export was occasioned by the contract of sale and the goods had in fact been exported. The present case, in our opinion, is covered completely by the decision of the Full Bench. We, therefore, answer question No. (1) in the affirmative.
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs Cauvery Spinning And Weaving Mills ... on 31 July, 1973
In National Carbon Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1969] 23 S.T.C. 388, the following general principles have been culled out from the above decision of the Supreme Court by a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court: (1) In order that a sale may qualify for exemption under Article 286(1)(b) of the Constitution as being a sale in the course of export, the sale must occasion the export. In other words, the exportation of the goods must be a part of the contract of sale or must be a necessary incidence thereof. (2) A sale can be said to occasion an export only (a) if there is a common intention of both the seller and the buyer to export, (b) there is an obligation to export and (c) there is an actual export. (3) The obligation to export may arise from statute, from contract or from the nature of the transaction. In other words, the obligation may be implicit or explicit. (4) The bond between the sale and the export should be such as cannot be broken without a breach of the obligation.
The State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By ... vs Thiru Cavuary Spinning And Weaving ... on 31 July, 1973
In National Carbon Company v. Commissioner of Sales Tax , the following general principles have been culled out from the above decision of the Supreme Court by a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
Liberty Footwear Co. vs Commissioner Of Sales Tax on 8 April, 1982
11. The decisions on which reliance was placed on behalf of the applicant were all cases in which the dealer was one who was privy to a contractual obligation to despatch goods outside the State in which the purchases had been made by him. That was the situation in the case of Hanuman Trading Co. [1979] 43 STC 408; 1979 UPTC 809. So also in National Carbon Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. AIR 1969 All 205 (FB), wherein the dealer had entered into a contract with Nepal dealers for supply of bulbs, etc., though, for convenience, delivery had been made to the purchasers within India and K. G. Khosla & Co. (P.)