TMI Blog1963 (8) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted and that therefore another levy cannot be made against them. The department did not accept this contention and assessed the turnover to tax. The petitioners' appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal also failed and hence this revision petition. The way in which the petitioners sought to save themselves from the levy of tax before the department and the Tribunal was to contend that Messrs Eastern Electric Company was their selling agents, that they actually sold the goods to the Madras State Electricity Board and that the turnover relating to that sale has been subject to tax which has been paid by the petitioners through Messrs Eastern Electric Company. It has however been held by the Tribunal that the facts of the case would not wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat it may not be necessary for us to charge this to you since the goods will be on consignment with you and that it would be sufficient for you to collect the sales tax from the department and pay it to the Sales Tax Authorities. On this presumption we will refrain from charging any sales tax to you." There is enough indication in this letter to show that the transaction between the petitioners and the Eastern Electric Company was not one intended to be by way of sale. The Eastern Electric Company wrote back to the petitioner as follows on 16th May, 1959: "We agree to purchase the 2,000 dozens L.T. Shackle insulators along with the relative metal parts...............It is agreed between us that you should deliver the materials to the Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Entry 41 provides that the point of levy shall be the point of first sale in the State at the rate of six per cent. If there was really one sale, and, that was the first sale, that has already been taxed and the tax amount has been collected. Now the contention of the department is that the petitioners should be deemed to have sold the goods to the Eastern Electric Company and that company in turn actually sold the goods to the State Electricity Board. In other words, in the view of the department there are two sales, the first by the petitioners in favour of the Eastern Electric Company and the second by the company in favour of the Board. If this position were to be accepted it would mean that the collection of the tax in regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany was under a contractual obligation to supply goods to the Board and they would perform the contract in any way they liked either by supplying the goods belonging to them from their stock or by directing a third party who had the stock to supply them directly to the Board. It is true that the Board did become the owner of the goods the moment they were delivered. But, it would be nothing incongruous or strange to hold that the property passed directly from the petitioners to the State Electricity Board. It is unnecessary for us to express any opinion on the question whether the case of selling agency as put forward by the petitioners is well-founded or not. The onus is upon the department to show that there was a sale by the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
