CA Bimal Jain
Annamalaiar Mills Ltd. (the Respondent), carrying on business in States of Tamil Nadu, placed an order for supply of specific number of cotton bales to the Maharashtra State Co-operative Cotton Growers Marketing Federation Ltd., Bombay (the Federation) situated at Maharashtra. The Respondent and the Federation was maintaining a common godown. The Federation confirmed order of the Respondent and moved the goods from Maharashtra to a godown in Tamil Nadu, which was under common control. Further, in the lorry way bill, the Respondent was shown as buyer of goods and the Federation as seller.
The Respondent claimed that transaction with the Federation was inter-state sale, however the Assessing Authority as well as the First Appellate Authority claimed that such transaction was a local sale.
The Hon’ble High Court of Madras held that when the specified quantity and quality of cotton bales are moved from State of Maharashtra to the State of Tamil Nadu with reference to the firm purchase order placed by the Respondent to the Federation, with lorry way bill showing the Respondent as buyer of goods and the Federation as seller, it clearly shows that there is an inter-state movement of cotton, which has been wrongly alleged as local purchase by the Assessing Officer.
(Author can be reached at Email: email@example.com)
Do you think CBDT should extend Tax Audit Report and relevant ITR Due Date? Please Comment, Vote, Retweet and Like.— Tax Guru (@taxguru_in) September 18, 2018