TMI Blog1992 (8) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nover of Rs. 7,18,032.25 representing the sales of edibles and refreshments in the canteen run by the appellant. The assessing officer overruled the objection of the appellant that they are entitled to the benefit of exemption granted in G.O. Press No. 2238, Revenue dated September 1, 1964. The first appellate authority sustained the claim of the appellant on the ground that the appellant is entitled to the benefits of G.O. dated September 1, 1964 referred to supra. 2.. While matters stood thus, the then Commissioner of Taxes invoked the powers under section 34 of the Act to set aside the relief granted by the first appellate authority on the ground that the appellant was not entitled to the exemption granted in the G.O. referred to above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, this appeal has been filed. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. In our view, the exception could be legally taken to the conclusion of the Joint Commissioner that the appellant cannot take advantage of the orders of the Government in G.O. Press, No. 2238, Revenue dated September 1, 1964. It has been found as a fact that it has not been challenged even before us that during the assessment year in question the appellant not only catered to the needs of their own employees but also catered to the needs of the employees of other amalgamated groups of companies of which two companies were not under a statutory obligation to run a canteen. If that be the position, the decision reported in [1977] 39 STC 265 (Mad.) (Deputy Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ein the learned Judges of the Division Bench considered the issue de hors the exemption notification referred to supra in the light of a claim made on the basis of the decision of the apex Court in Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi [1978] 42 STC 386 and [1980] 45 STC 212. The learned Judges while referring to the findings recorded therein observed that the conclusions arrived at were made without collecting any material on the actual sales made in the canteen, but merely on surmises. As referred to supra, even in the case before us the plea made on behalf of the appellant was rejected on the ground that there is no question of services in the canteen referred to and it was also not proved as a fact. The conclusio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TC 212 [Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi] and the matter is remitted to the assessing authority with a direction to restore the matter for consideration of the question of taxability or otherwise of the turnover relating to canteen sales to the tune of Rs. 7,16,032.25 in the light of the decision in [1980] 45 STC 212 (SC) [Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi]. The assessing authority shall give sufficient opportunity to the appellant and determine the issue relating to the taxability or otherwise of the said turnover relating to the canteen sales in the light of the decision reported in [1980] 45 STC 212 (SC) [Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi] and in accorda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
