Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (2) TMI 806

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from D7 records that for the period from March 9, 1985 to March 31, 1985, the assessee had purchased casuarina wood to the extent of Rs. 1,82,848. The assessing authority treated the said turnover as actual suppression and made an equal addition by way of estimation. He also proposed penalty at 1 times the actual tax. 2.. Similarly for the assessment year 1986-87, it was found that the assessee had purchased casuarina wood barked in 60 c.m. length from agriculturists and transported them to their head office at Dandeli. He, therefore, held that such purchases were liable to be taxed under section 7-A(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 at 5 per cent. The turnover involved in the year 1986-87 was Rs. 13,09,229. Before the ass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... irewood. 4.. The appeals to the second Appellate Tribunal for both the assessment years, were taken up together and disposed of on April 24, 1990. The Appellate Tribunal has gone into the question of the applicability of section 7-A of the TNGST Act, 1959 and held in favour of the Revenue. So far as the exemption claimed in respect of the casuarina wood, the Appellate Tribunal rejected the contentions in the following words: The casuarina poles purchased with specification of particular size (barked in 60 c.m. length) and for the specific use in the manufacture of paper cannot be treated as firewood. It is seen that casuarina poles barked in 60 c.m. length were used as raw material by the paper manufacturer for making wood pulp to prod .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessee has to be treated only as firewood and therefore, eligible for exemption under the notification cited above. 6.. In support of his argument, reliance is placed on [1979] 43 STC 435 (All.) (Commissioner of Sales Tax, Lucknow v. Marwah Co.). That is no doubt a direct case. The only difference is that in that case, the assessee was a dealer in fuel wood. He purchased fuel wood from various persons. When he supplied the wood purchased to the paper mills for manufacture of paper, the assessing authority treated the wood as pulp wood and not as firewood. The first appellate authority treated the wood sold as firewood and not as timber. On revision, the view of the first appellate authority was confirmed. When the matter was taken up .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er test is logical and not conclusive. The particular use to which an article can be applied in the hands of a special consumer, is not determinative of the nature of the goods. Mr. N. Inbarajan relies upon the above observation. But, it has to be noticed that the Supreme Court was only considering the use to which a particular hypothetical consumer could put to. They were not considering a case of a purchase by an actual consumer as raw material for manufacturing paper. This aspect of the case has been more explained in certain judgments of the Madras High Court. 8.. In [1982] 51 STC 353 (Mad.) (K.S. Vasan and Sons v. State of Tamil Nadu), the assessee was a dealer in firewood. He purchased cut-ends and sized below 1.2 metres for use in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ve to find out whether the wood involved in this case were purchased as firewood for the purpose of fuel and consequently, exempt under the Government notification. If we look at from this angle, there is no escape from the conclusion that these goods were purchased only for use in the paper industry. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant the said exemption to the case before us, because admittedly, the goods were purchased for use in the paper industry. If there had been no evidence one way or the other, we might have adopted the common parlance theory that casuarina is normally used only as firewood. Inasmuch as there is clear evidence that casuarina was purchased only for the purpose of use in the paper industry, we are unable to strai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates