TMI Blog1963 (11) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and contentions advanced and the authorities cited at the Bar. Reference No. 34 of 1963. In this reference, the petitioners own two units of textile mills in Ahmedabad, which were purchased some years ago as going concerns. In recent years, the petitioner-company embarked upon a programme of modernizing its machinery and as part of that programme, the company sold old looms, carding engines and other machinery during the assessment period 1953-54. There were in all 16 sales to different purchasers and the total price received by the petitioner-company was Rs. 2,01,808. The petitioner-company realised sales tax from the purchasers in respect of 12 sales out of the total 16 sales, the sale price whereof was Rs. 58,308 in the aggregate. No sales tax was realised on the remaining 4 sales, the sale price whereof aggregated to Rs. 1,43,500. During the assessment proceedings, it was contended by the petitioner-company that the remaining 4 sales of machinery, in respect of which the petitioner-company had realised the amount of Rs. 1,43,500, should be excluded from the total turnover and should not be subjected to sales tax. The contentions urged by the petitioner-company were rejec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner-company in selling second-hand machinery was that delivery was effected against payment in cash or against payment in advance and, therefore, sale invoices used to be prepared when deliveries were effected. The result of this practice was that even though several machines were sold to one party, since the delivery of the machinery was effected on different dates convenient to the purchasers, different sale invoices had to be prepared and, therefore, there would apparently appear a number of transactions despite there being actually one transaction. Before the Sales Tax Tribunal, the contentions urged by the parties before these officers were repeated, but they met with the same fate. Upon these facts, the Tribunal has referred to us the following question for answer: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sum of Rs. 2,01,808 is liable to be included in the taxable turnover of the petitioner and subjected to tax?" It is clear from the judgment of the Tribunal that the factors which weighed with it in arriving at its conclusion were: (1) that the sales in question fulfilled the test of volume and degree of frequency, (2) that these sales were made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not sold in one lot as it was neither practicable nor commercially prudent to do so, as it would not have fetched the best price. Mr. Mehta contended that these facts did not constitute frequency of sales, as understood by the authorities relied upon by the Tribunal. Before we proceed to examine these contentions and the authorities cited before us, it would be better first to have a glance at the provisions of the Act which were applicable during the relevant period. The Act applicable is Act 3 of 1953 prior to its amendment in 1954. Section 5 thereof, which is the charging section and levies a general tax, provides that"(1) Subject to the provisions of section 8 every dealer (a) who immediately prior to the date of commencement of this Act was liable to pay the general tax under the Bombay Sales Tax (No. 2) Ordinance, 1952, or (b) whose turnover in respect of all sales exceeds Rs. 30,000 during the year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1952, shall be liable to pay the general tax at the rates specified in sub-section (1) of section 6 on his taxable turnover in respect of sales of goods made on or after the date of commencement of this Act." Section 10, which levie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such business, are subjected to tax levied by section 5 and 10 of the Act. The Act does not define "business" and, therefore, the word "business" as used in section 2(6) has to be understood in its ordinary meaning. The question as to what is business has arisen in the past in some decided cases, two at least of them were pointed out to us, where an attempt has been made not to define but to indicate what it is. In Smith v. Anderson[1820] 15 Ch. 247, at p. 258., Jessel, M.R., observed that "business" is a word of large and indefinite import, and after examining its dictionary meanings proceeded to observe that it is a word of extensive use and indefinite signification. "Business" is a particular occupation as agriculture, trade, mechanics, art, or profession. At page 259, he observed: "Now, knowing what 'business' means, is there any distinction between a person carrying on any other business which has for its object the acquisition of gain, and the words 'formed for the purpose of the acquisition of gain'? It must be a business to acquire gain, and really the words add nothing to it............. You cannot acquire gain by means of a company except by carrying on some business ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of investments consisting of purchase and resale, though profitable, are clearly outside the domain of adventures in the nature of trade. In deciding the character of such transactions several factors are relevant, such as, e.g., whether the purchaser was a trader and the purchase of the commodity and its resale were allied to his usual trade or business or incidental to it; the nature and quantity of the commodity purchased and resold; any act subsequent to the purchase to improve the quality of the commodity purchased and thereby make it more readily resaleable; any act prior to the purchase showing a design or purpose; the incidents associated with the purchase and resale; the similarity of the transaction to operations usually associated with trade or business; the repetition of the transaction; the element of pride of possession. A person may purchase a piece of art, hold it for some time and if a profitable offer is received sell it. During the time that the purchaser had its possession he may be able to claim pride of possession and aesthetic satisfaction; and if such a claim is upheld that would be a factor against the transaction being in the nature of trade. The presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of buildings for colleges, residential quarters for the staff and hostels for the students. Realising that it would be cheaper and more economical to manufacture bricks for the construction of the buildings, the Society set up a brick factory and supplied the bricks manufactured there to their contractor. As the Society manufactured more bricks than were actually necessary for their own construction work, they disposed of the surplus from time to time to sister educational institutions and individuals at cost price. The Society also obtained a permit from Government to import steel for the purpose of their buildings. After the arrival of the steel, the Government gave them a permit to buy steel locally. As the Society thereafter did not require the imported steel, they sold, as directed by the Collector, the steel to other persons requiring it. These two activities did not result in any profit to the Society. The question was whether the Society, in respect of these transactions, came within the ambit of the definition of a "dealer" under the Bombay Sales Tax Act. It was held that as there was no intention on the part of the Society to sell the goods at the time when the bricks we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding of fact in that case that the sole object of the Education Society was to make bricks for their own buildings, and for various reasons large quantity was produced and that quantity being liable to deteriorate, they had to be disposed of without the Society making any profit whatsoever, precluded the Society from being a dealer within the meaning of the statutory definition of that word. As we have pointed out, the decision left open the question whether profitmaking motive was an essential ingredient in order that an activity should constitute business and it is, therefore, clear that what weighed with the learned Judge was the fact that when the Society manufactured bricks, it did so only for the purpose of using them for construction of its own buildings and not with the initial intention or object to sell them at profit. According to the view taken in this decision, if the intention was to sell the bricks ultimately, such an intention would be indicative of business, but in the absence of such an intention or object, the mere continuity of transactions or the degree of frequency of sales was not considered sufficient for the transactions in question to be transactions in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at of selling the seeds. It was there pointed out that there may be engrafted upon that, no doubt, as in many cases there is, the occupation of producing that which the merchant sold, and then he was a manufacturer as well as a merchant, and in such a case the occupation which he was carrying on at the farm was really the manufacturing of seeds to be used in his business. The principle emerging from this decision is that if a person is carrying on a certain activity, such as farming, though that activity might not be business, but if there was engrafted to that activity another activity, such as selling the seeds grown by him, as business, he would be both a manufacturer as well as a merchant. But it is clear that his activities would not constitute business unless sales of seeds made by him are sales in the course of business. In Steelage Industries Ltd. v. The State of Bombay[1957] 8 S. T. C. 376., the principle laid down was that if a sale is a casual one, having no connection with the business for which the person is registered or is liable to be registered, the sale price would not be liable to be included in the taxable turnover nor would such sale price be liable to tax. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lal Jiwanlal v. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals), Nagpur[1957] 8 S. T. C. 732. The petitioner there was an occupant of as many as 542 acres situate in different villages in Akola District. In about 440 acres, he had sown and raised crops of cotton, groundnuts and grains. After meeting his personal requirements he sold away the balance of the crops during three periods of assessments for a price of Rs. 69,000 and odd Rs. 29,000 and odd and Rs. 88,000 and odd respectively. He was also carrying on business as sole proprietor under the name and style of Messrs Ramsukhdar Girdharilal in coal, machinery, cotton, cottonseed, groundnut and cotton bales, and in respect of this business was a registered dealer. In the assessment proceedings, the Sales Tax Officer, in computing the total turnover, took into account not merely the turnover of the business referred to above, but also the amount realised by sale of his agricultural produce. It was held that a person did not necessarily fall within the definition of "dealer" merely because he sold or supplied commodities and that in order to bring him within the definition of "dealer" it was necessary to show that he carried on those ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contrary. The case of Aryodaya Spinning and Weaving Company Limited v. The State of Bombay[1960] 11 S.T.C. 141., is yet another case of a registered dealer but where a different test was applied. The assessees there had a factory which was a spinning and weaving plant. They applied for registration under the Sales Tax Act for sale of goods manufactured by them and in that application, they stated that they were carrying on the business of selling yarn, cloth, cotton, waste, waste stores etc., and accordingly the assessees were registered as dealers. During the relevant period, they sold some excess cotton and also cotton waste. These sales were sought to be charged to sales tax by the authorities and the contention of the assessees was that they were not carrying on the business of selling cotton or cotton waste and, therefore, the price received for those sales could not be included in computing the turnover. These contentions were negatived and it was held by the High Court that although the normal business of the assessees was the manufacture of yarn and cloth, cotton waste, which was a subsidiary product, was normally sold and, in the circumstances, an intention to carry on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not relevant whether the object clause in the memorandum of association includes such an object or not and it is equally irrelevant whether the mills had registered themselves as dealers in such commodities or not. Mr. Mehta, who pointed out this decision to us, himself conceded that these two reasons upon which this decision was based were not correct criterions and that the decision can hardly be of assistance to us in the present case. A. Ebrahim Co. v. State of Bombay[1962] 13 S.T.C. 877., is still another case where the assessee-company was a dealer, doing wholesale and retail business of selling separated parts of ship machinery and ferrous and non-ferrous metals. The assesseecompany purchased a ship from an Indian company reserving to itself the option either of using the ship for trading or breaking up and selling its separated parts. It entered into an agreement with another company to sell the ship and the agreement provided inter alia that the steamer would be delivered as and where she lay in Bombay and that the purchasers or their representatives would be allowed to go on board the steamer on the day of the delivery and further that the purchasers were at liberty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held liable to sales tax, it must be shown that his dealings were part of his business activity indicated as such by the existence of profit motive. Thus, in H. Abdul Bakshi Brothers, Hyderabad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh [1960] 11 S.T.C. 526., a case arising under section 2(e) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950, and rule 5(2) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Rules, 1950, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that the expression "business " in the definition of "dealer" was used in a commercial sense and therefore there must exist a profit motive in regard to the commodities in respect of which the impost is sought to be levied and therefore where a person bought large quantities of any category of goods for the purpose of consumption or for any other purpose unconnected with the business in that commodity he could not be regarded as a businessman within the mischief of rule 5. The test of profit motive was also emphasized by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the State of M.P. v. Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mills, Ltd. [1961] 12 S. T. C. 333. In that case, the mills gave a contract for the construction of some buildings to J.K. Mitra Co. The mills obtained steel and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a determinative factor in coming to the conclusion whether the assessee was carrying on business. The same High Court again emphasized the test of profit motive in Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh v. Ram Dulare Balkishan and Bros [1963] 14 S.T.C. 202. The assessee there were bus operators and carried on the business of providing transport and owned several buses and trucks. During the relevant period, they sold unserviceable cars, trucks, tyres and other used motor accessories to various persons. The question was whether these sales were includible in the total turnover of the assessee. The High Court held that the assessees' sales of unserviceable vehicles and motor accessories were not sales by a dealer in the course of business of selling or supplying those goods and the sales were, therefore, not liable to tax. The High Court again emphasized that an activity, though continuous, serious and large, could not assume the characteristics of business unless it was an activity coming within the definition of a "dealer" given in the Act and that the true test was not whether the selling activity was continuous or repeated, but whether the carrying on of continuous operation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business. I think that the expression has a narrower meaning than that of doing business or having business to do. In my opinion, it imports that the person has control and direction with respect to a business, and also that it is a business carried on for some pecuniary gain." The profit motive was again emphasized by the High Court of Madras in L.M.S. Sadak Thamby and Co. v. The State of Madras[1963] 14 S.T.C. 753., where, dealing with the definition of a "dealer" in section 2(g) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the learned Judges stated that though the definition of "dealer" would include a person who solely carries on the business of buying goods, such buying of goods must be in the course of business, which means that the activity should be associated with a profit-making motive. The test of volume and degree of frequency was canvassed before the High Court of Kerala in Gosri Dairy, Vyttila v. The State of Kerala[1961] 12 S.T.C. 683. It is necessary to state a few facts in this case and the reasoning applied thereto by the learned Judges there, as it is a decision considerably relied upon by the learned Advocate-General. The assessees in this case were a firm de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where it is accepted as acquisition of monetary gain, and not the contentment of the labour employed or the resultant better outturn. Running a canteen for the benefit of the employees does not amount to business activity, as held in State of Mysore v. The Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Co., Ltd.[1962] 13 S.T.C. 106. The contention of the mills there that the stores run by them were a mere amenity and not an activity with a profit motive was accepted by the High Court. If running a canteen is regarded as an amenity, it is difficult to appreciate how supply of food-grains can be regarded as not an amenity, but a business activity. As we have said, the learned Advocate-General leaned heavily upon the decision of the High Court of Kerala and argued that the disposals of dry cattle in that case were a regular and frequent feature of the business of the assessee-firm and were regarded by the High Court as acts of carrying on business by the firm as such disposals were the necessary incidents of that business, cattle being the vital means of business and the sales of dry cattle being necessary for the economical running of that business. He also argued that in the case of such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ya Pradesh in fact disagreed with the decision of the Kerala High Court. In Shri Vivekanand Mills Ltd. v. The State of Bombay, Sales Tax Reference No. 36 of 1958 decided on the 23rd of July, 1959, by a Division Bench of the High Court of BombayUnreported., it was laid down that sales, if they are to be treated as part of the turnover, must possess not only regularity and continuity but must be incidental to the normal business conducted by the assessee or have some relation with his business. The learned Judges there observed that the statement of the case before them did not indicate that the assessees were disposing of cotton purchased by them as an incident to their normal business and they further observed that the sales of 411 bales of Californian cotton, which was the sale is dispute was a casual transaction and not as an incident of the business of the assessees, and was occasioned because the cotton was regarded as unsuitable for manufacturing yarn or for some other similar reasons. Therefore, merely because a person sells goods or commodities which have become unserviceable or which are unsuitable for his business, does not by itself make him a dealer in those goods or the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at view, sales of such fixed assets can possibly be regarded as sales in the course of business. The learned Advocate-General, on the other hand, tried to analyse these various decisions and sought first to classify the assessees into two classes, (1) a dealer, and (2) a non-dealer, and then attempted to formulate a rule, viz, that there would be three tests applicable in all cases: (1) a reasonable nexus with the normal business activity of a dealer, (2) profit motive including the intention or the object to curtail loss, and (3) volume and degree of frequency. According to him if two at least of the three criterions were existent, the sale would be amenable to tax and that criterions (2) and (3) would apply to dealers and non-dealers both whereas criterion (1) would apply to dealers only. But as we have already observed, the term "business" being of a wide connotation and the activities in a trade or a business being of an extremely varied character, it would be hazardous to lay down a hard and fast criterion and it would not be possible to say that only the three criterions suggested by the learned Advocate-General would be exhaustive. Nor would it be possible to say that where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. The sales, therefore, were realizations of the assets of the mills effected in consequence of their phased programme for installation of modern plant and machinery and were not in pursuance of a design or a scheme for profit-making. In view of these circumstances, neither the volume nor the degree of frequency in the present case would be a decisive test. It cannot be disputed that the machinery that was disposed of was not purchased with any original intention to sell it. It was obviously purchased and installed for its use for producing textile goods. As we have said before, ordinarily one cannot be said to be carrying on business of selling assets and therefore, sales of such assets, when they have become useless or unserviceable either by reason of their having to be substituted by modern machinery or by the usual wear and tear, cannot be regarded as business or business activity. But the learned Advocate-General contended that the assessees had to instal new machinery for the old and modernize their mills if they wanted to survive economically and, therefore, new machinery had to be installed and the old ones disposed of as an incident of the business and the sales theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng goods rather than to sell it at profit at some future date. When such an asset is sold, it cannot therefore be said to have been sold with a profit motive. But the learned Advocate-General contended that whenever plant or machinery is sold by a trading concern, the excess or the deficit of the sale price, as compared to the depreciated value, is always credited or debited, as the case may be, to the trading account and it is, therefore, reflected in the profit or loss of the trading concern. The sale of plant or machinery, though capital assets, thus affects the profit or loss and it cannot therefore be said that there is no profit motive involved in the sale of plant or machinery. In our view, this contention is founded upon a misapprehension of the correct position. Since the plant and machinery are used for earning revenue and in the process they suffer depreciation, such depreciation is charged to the profit and loss account, for, as observed by Fletcher Moulton, L.J., in the case of The Spanish Prospecting Company Limited In re [1911] 1 Ch. 92. , cited with approval in Ashokbhai Chimanbhai (H.U.F.) v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat [1962] 2 G.L.R. 78 at p. 82; 44 I.T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Speed Warping Machine for a sum of Rs. 35,700. This was, however, not the only or the isolated sale effected by the assessee-company. The assessee-company carried on business as manufacturers of cloth and during the years 1953-54, 1954-55, 1955-56 and 1956-57, the company sold some of its old machinery and replaced it by new machinery. It was urged by the learned counsel for the State that the sale of the old machinery by the company was in the course of its business activity, and in support of that contention, he relied upon the memorandum of association of the company which authorised the company to re-sell from time to time machinery and plant as the directors might think proper. The memorandum was also relied upon as showing that it permitted the company to carry on business, apart from their main business as manufacturers of cloth, in any other business which might seem to the company capable of being conveniently carried on and it also empowered the company to sell or dispose of the undertaking of the company or any part thereof, and it was contended that the sale of its old machinery could as well form part of the business of the company. The learned counsel for the Sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n by a new one was not the business of the assessee, though the transactions were necessary for the effective carrying on of their business, and held that the sale in question, though it was an item of several such sales, could not be said to have been done in the course of business activity, and therefore the assessees would not be a dealer as regards the transaction in question. They there observed: "The business of the respondent-company was the manufacture of cloth. For the said business the company had from time to time replaced its old and unserviceable machinery by new machinery. Although such replacements of the old machinery by new machinery may have been necessitated for the purposes of the business of the company the disposal of the old machinery for the purposes of replacing it by new machinery cannot be said to be a part of the business of the respondent-company." The facts and circumstances in the case before the High Court at Bombay were substantially similar to the facts and circumstances before us and, as we have already stated, the decision referred to above considerably fortifies the conclusion which we have arrived at. The Allahabad decision in Mining and Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the purchasers, who had bought from them certain quantities of taxable goods, came to Rs. 1,37,907. Out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 68,953 was allowed by the Deputy Commissioner and, therefore, the question that now remains to be decided is with regard to the balance. The finding of the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, which was accepted by the Tribunal, in regard to the rebate was that the petitioners had entered into an agreement of sale of taxable goods manufactured by them with several dealers and the goods were sold to them at the rates mentioned in those contracts. Before, however, the purchasers took delivery, there was a fall in prices and the purchasers declined to take delivery of those goods. Consequently, with a view to avoid losses, the petitioners induced the purchasers to take delivery of those goods assuring them that a part of the loss borne by them as a result of fall in prices, would be compensated by way of rebate and accordingly, the petitioners issued credit notes in favour of those customers. On these facts, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the sales effected by the petitioners in respect of stores, old machinery and other sundry articles wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s must be held to be incidental to the carrying on of the business of the assessees. It is in a way true that when a businessman disposes of unserviceable goods, the sale price realised would go to reduce the cost of production of the goods he manufactures. But reduction of cost price in this way is only an incidental result and cannot be said to be profit motive, for, the disposals are not made for making profit out of articles and things so disposed of. It is, therefore, a fallacy to say that there is a profit motive behind such disposals. As regards the second aspect of the contention, though there is an element of necessity or compulsion in such disposals in the sense that no factory owner can afford to go on collecting old and useless stores, it is difficult to agree with the proposition that such disposals are an incidence in or incidental to the business carried on by the assessees. A thing can be said to be incidental to a business if it is part of it or arises out of it. A disposal of such stores is really not a part of the manufacturing process, nor can it be rightly said to be part of such business. The sales of discarded goods or machinery are, therefore, not incidental ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... namely, that in the case of kolsi and waste caustic liquor, the two result because of the use of consumable stores with which the machinery is worked or manufacturing process is undergone, whereas cotton waste is a resultant of and arises from raw materials used for manufacturing the final product. A bye-product is a product resulting from the process of manufacturing at any point or stage of the process, while kolsi and waste caustic liquor are merely waste materials and are not products in any sense whatsoever. Coal and caustics are in fact wastes in manufacture, but not so cotton, out of which the commodity is made. Kolsi and waste caustic liquor are, therefore, not comparable with cotton waste. It is also clear that in the sales of these materials, there was not, and could not be, any profit motive. Their sales are therefore not incidental to the business in the sense in which that expression is understood, and the volume and frequency of sales are not inconsistent with the sales not being in the course of business or not being a business activity. As regards the question of rebate, the relevant provisions are the definitions of "sale price" and "turnover" appearing in sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed and after the invoices on the basis of the original contract prices were prepared and given to the purchasers. Furthermore, the remissions were given, not by reducing the rates agreed to in the contracts, but such remissions were given by means of credit notes and that too, in a lump sum. It is, therefore, not possible to accept the contention of Mr. Mehta that there was a recession of the original contracts or that the original contracts were replaced by new contracts. Mr. Kaji, who appears in another Sales Tax Reference on our Board, took our permission to supplement the arguments advanced by Mr. Mehta, as the reference in which he is interested also involves an identical point. Mr. Kaji contended that since the contract was an executory contract, it was open to both the parties to change the terms by mutual agreement and that it was open, therefore, for the parties to modify the terms in the contracts as to the purchase price and that such modification would not require any consideration. In our view, that contention is ill-founded, for, even a modification in a contract requires consideration and it is quite clear that no consideration flowed from the purchasers. The content ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13 was the sale price of stores in respect of which the Tribunal has made an order of remand. The only question therefore that remains to be determined in this reference is with reference to the sale price of scrap, namely, Rs. 34,203. The points for consideration arising in this reference are the same as in the previous two references and on the view which we have taken in those two references, the conclusion is that the sales of scrap goods would not be includible in the total turnover, as they cannot be said to be sales effected in the course of business or as a business activity. That being so, our answer to question No. 1 will be in the negative. In view of that answer, answer to question No. 2 becomes unnecessary. The State will pay to the petitioners the costs of this reference. Reference No. 6 of 1963. The assessment period in this reference is from the 1st of November, 1952, to the 31st of March, 1953, and the point that arises for our consideration in this reference is with regard to the sales of stores etc., the sale price realised by the assessee-company being Rs. 54,829. In view of our decision in reference No. 34 of 1963 and reference No. 3 of 1963, it must be held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
