9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (3) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount for 1951-52 was Rs. 6,743 representing the cost of gunny bags, and a further sum of Rs. 33,761 representing the cost of mats etc., which the assessee used for packing the materials which he had sold. In the year 1952-53 the items were Rs. 3,554, the cost of gunnies, and Rs. 38,669, the cost of mats. The Tribunal found that the appellants had shown the packing charges separately from the price of the goods sold. The further finding of the Tribunal was: "We fail to understand how the Commercial Tax Officer held that the charges realised by the appellants for these services are assessable to tax. There can be no service on account of packing with- out the use of packing materials and the attempt of the Commercial Tax Officer to separate t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rges for packing separately in his bills, without including them in the price of the goods sold. No doubt, his charges for packing included the cost of the materials, but the cost of the materials used for packing the gunny bags and the mats was not shown as different items in the bills. It was inclusive charges that he added to the bills "for packing". The learned Government Pleader urged that the expression "other such like services" in rule 5(1)(g)(ii) delimited the scope of the earlier expression "charges for packing and delivery." Such an interpretation of a statutory pro- vision, we are unable to accept. Charges for packing as such, if they have been specified and charged by the dealer separately without including them in the price of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld that the packing materials were extraneous marketable materials used to preserve dried tobacco from contamination or loss. After pointing out at page 35 "the accounts clearly show that he (assessee) charged for the material in addition to his remuneration for drying the tobacco, though the price shown in the accounts is the inclusive one", the learned Chief justice held that all the ingredients of the charging section, read with the definitions of sale and turnover in the Act had been satisfied. The conclusion of the learned Chief Justice was: "......We hold that the packing materials were goods and that there was a sale in regard to them within the meaning of the Act. If (1) [1954] 5 S.T.C. 354. (3) [1956] 7 S.T.C. 26. (2) [1951] 2 S.T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
