TMI Blog1965 (12) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee falls within the expression "any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before delivery thereof". The assessee by paying the Central sales tax when he bought the goods did not do anything to the goods, and the tax was paid in respect of the transaction of purchase and not in respect of the goods. - Civil Appeal No. 64, 65 of 1965, - - - Dated:- 13-12-1965 - SUBBA RAO K. AND SHAH J.C. JJ. O.P. Malhotra and R.N. Sachthey, for the appellant. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the Court was delivered by SIKRI, J.- These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the Orissa High Court in a reference made to it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. (i) 'turnover' means the aggregate of the sale prices and tax, if any, received or receivable by a dealer, in respect of the sale or supply of goods or carrying out of any contract effected or made during a given period. " "Taxable turnover" was defined in section 5(2) of the Act as follows: "5. (2) In this Act, the expression 'taxable turnover' means that part of a dealer's gross turnover during any period which remains after deducting therefrom- * * * (b) the tax, if any, paid by the purchaser to the dealer." These appeals are concerned with the assessments for the quarter ending September 30, 1957, and for the quarter ending December 31, 1957, but it would be sufficient if facts relating to the assessment for the quarter en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mer." This Notification was issued under the Iron and Steel Control Order, 1956, which order was passed in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Section 2 of the Control Order defined "controlled stock-holder" as "a stock-holder appointed by the Controller to hold stocks of iron or steel under such terms and conditions as he may prescribe from time to time". It further appears that under the Iron and Steel Control Order, read with the Iron and Steel (Control) Notification, a controlled stock- holder was not entitled to charge a price higher than that fixed by the Government of India. As stated earlier, in view of these pro- visions, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that Central sales tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 88. The principle, according to the Madras High Court in Krishnaswami Mudaliar's case [1954] 5 S.T.C. 88., was as follows: "In our opinion, if we may say so with respect, this passage from the judgment of the learned Chief Justice [of the Calcutta High Court in Bata Shoe Co. case [1949] 1 S.T.C. 193.] clearly brings out the distinction between cases where the dealer is not authorised by law to collect the tax but all the same adds it to the sale price in the bill of sale and collects it from the customer and cases where the dealer is so authorised. In the former case it is undoubtedly part of the purchase price, as all the collections made by the dealer from the purchaser must be treated as constituting part of the sale price. If, howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts before us: (1) That the expression "tax" in section 2(i) and section 5(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act means the tax levied under the Orissa Sales Tax Act and not under the Central Sales Tax Act; (2) That the expression "valuable consideration" occurring in section 2(h) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act includes the Central sales tax realised by the assessee; and (3) That the expression "any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before delivery thereof" included the Central sales tax paid by the assessee at the purchase point. As we have come to the conclusion that the expression "valuable consideration" and the word "turnover" do not include the Central sales tax paid by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el Control Order, 1956, and the Iron and Steel (Control) Notification dated October 18, 1958. In our opinion, the fact that the price which the stock-holder was entitled to charge was statutorily fixed and the stock-holder was not entitled to and did not charge more are sufficient to enable us to come to the conclusion that the Central sales tax paid under the provisions of the Iron and Steel (Control) Notification did not form part of the price paid by the customer to the assessee. There is no force in the contention that the Central sales tax realised by the assessee falls within the expression "any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before delivery thereof". The assessee by paying th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
