TMI Blog1954 (7) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the plaintiffs from the Bombay merchants. On the date of the receipt of the goods a bill would be prepared and the signature of the principal customer taken and a commission of 5 annas per Rs. 100 in the case of gold, and 6 annas per Rs. 100 in the case of silver would be given to the plaintiffs. To put it shortly, their case is that they purchased silver and gold from the Bombay merchants for and on behalf of their customers and that they received nothing more than the commission to which they were entitled. The defendant contended in the written statement that the plaintiffs were not commission agents for the purchase of gold and silver and that they carried on the said business in the year of assessment, not as agents of known principa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture incurred in connection with the telegrams alleged to have been sent by the plaintiffs to the Bombay merchants was not debited to the plaintiffs' accounts. Nor do the accounts maintained by the customers disclose that any amount was spent by them for sending the said telegrams. The accounts maintained by the Bombay merchants have not been produced. The correspondence that must have passed between the plaintiffs and the Bombay merchants has not been produced. But the accounts of the plaintiffs show that, in respect of the suit transac- tions, the plaintiffs had only taken commission. The bills establish that the plaintiffs passed on the goods received by them from the Bombay merchants to their customers and the price charged was only the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Tax Act. The learned Judges held that the definition of "dealer" in Section 2(b) would cover also cases of persons mentioned in Section 8, who would but for that section, be liable to taxation under Section 3. The learned Chief Justice laid down that under certain circumstances a commission agent doing business would fall within the definition of "dealer" and that neither the definition of "dealer" nor of "sale" contemplates as a necessary condition that the goods sold should belong to the person selling or buying and that there can be a sale or purchase on behalf of another. In this case, on the facts found the plaintiffs were dealing on their own behalf. They did not purport (1) [1952] 3 S.T.C. 121; I.L.R. 1952 Mad. 571. to purchase th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith one of the conditions of the licence, the condition which was not complied with was not a very material condition, and therefore, it could be ignored. I do not see any justification for that distinction between material and non-material conditions in the provisions of Sec- tion 8 of the Act. Once it is conceded that the condition laid in rule 12 is a condition subject to which the licence is issued, it follows that non-compliance with such condition disentitles to the exemption under Section 8 of the Act. I would, therefore, hold that even if the plaintiffs are commission agents within the meaning of Section 8 of the Act, they not having complied with the condition of the licence are not exempted from payment of the tax. The judgment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
