TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1950 (7) TMI 1
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tirunelveli in O.S. No. 1 of 1947 and raises an interesting question of law. The appellant, who was the plaintiff, filed a suit against the Government for a declaration that the sales tax collected from him to the extent of Rs. 1,202-8-6 on the turnover calculated only on the price of the gunny bags containing the salt sold by him (excluding, of course, the price of the salt, which is exempted fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant's suit with costs. We have perused the records and heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader contra. The learned counsel for the appellant relied on three main contentions. The first was that the appellant was not a "dealer" within the meaning of Section 2(b) as he was not carrying on the business of buying and selling gunny bags (which were adm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....salt has to be packed for being sent to the customers, in addition to the salt itself, as "necessity" will be of no avail as the customers could have supplied the gunny bags or taken away the salt themselves. The Government, we understand, have been moved subsequently for the amendment of the rules and to exempt the price of gunny bags also from sales tax, and that they have conceded this demand. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contention was that the appellant had not made any profit from the sale of gunny bags, and that the contention of the Com- mercial Tax Officer that he had made a profit of eight pies on each gunny bag was not well founded as the appellant was proved to have sold salt in some cases for less than the controlled price and the profit of 6¼ per cent. allowed to him. We consider that the questio....