TMI Blog1967 (4) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssociation, among others, is to make necessary arrangements to obtain maida, sugar and other requirements of its members, the bakeries of Madras, for the manufacture of bread, buns, cakes, biscuits and other confectionaries by the members. The Deputy Director (Rationing), Madras, by his proceedings dated 11th February, 1966, permitted the petitioner-association to draw the quota of their members from three flour mills, viz., Century Flour Mills, South India Flour Mills and Taj Roller and Flour Mills. The association was directed to pay the value of the allotment of their members per month in the form of demand drafts drawn in favour of the Deputy Director (Civil Supplies) and obtain necessary delivery orders on any of these flour mills. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he provisional assessment on the ground that the petitioner-association is not a dealer and that it is not liable to be assessed to any sales tax. The word "dealer" is defined in section 2(g) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Madras Act 1 of 1959), as meaning any person who carries on the business of buying, selling, supplying or distributing goods, directly or otherwise, whether for cash, or for deferred payment, or for commission, remuneration or other valuable consideration. "Business" is defined as including any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern In the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture, whether or not such trade, commerce, manufacture, adventure or concern Is carried on with a motive to make gain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . This activit will not amount to a business and the petitioner cannot be said to be a dealer. The petitioner-association is not engaged in buying or selling any commodity. All that it is doing is collecting and distributing the maida to its members. The contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner-association is not liable to tax has to be upheld. It was submitted on behalf of the department that the provisional assessment was made because the petitioner did not prefer any objections to the provisional assessment. It may be that the petitioner did not specifically prefer any objections to the notice dated 26th September, 1966. But in submitting his return, he had made it amply clear by his communication dated 23rd September, 1966, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
