1974 (9) TMI 88

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Sales Tax Act. The assessee disclosed a turnover in sun hemp, rope cutting, etc., of Rs. 8,27,127.01. It was indicated that on these transactions freight amounting to Rs. 18,552 was paid by the purchasers and, therefore, it was not included in the turnover. The assessing authority held that the freight was charged as a part of the sale price and it was liable to tax under the Central Sales Tax Ac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the judge (Revisions) it was conceded that the sales were made by the assessee on f.o.r. basis. The freight was paid by the purchasers. The bills were prepared by the assessee in the following way: The cost of 250 bales of hemp/BE Agmark as per above weighing Rs. 51,591.37 M. Tonnes 45-3-75 against supply order No. 8992/20(H) S.O. No. 912/ 8965 dated 22-12-1965 at Rs. 1,137 per M. Tonne f.o.r. Has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... artment, the learned standing counsel placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer[1960] 11 S.T.C. 827 (S.C.). This case was considered and followed by a Division Bench of this Court in United Timber Corporation v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P.[1972] 29 S.T.C. 646; 1972 U.P.T.C. 211. In both these cases the bills were framed in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ration included the charge on account of freight, the subsequent reduction on that account from the price was in conformity with the contractual condition that the purchaser should pay the freight. It could not be said, therefore, that having regard to the terms of the contract the price could include the charge on account of freight. In accordance with the terms of the contract, the price shown i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y added. It should not have been shown in the bill. The present case is in line with the decision in Hyderabad Asbestos Cement Products case[1969] 24 S.T.C. 487 (S.C.)., and on this view the decisions in United Timber Corporation[1972] 29 S.T.C. 646. as well as in Tungabhadra Industries[1960] 11 S.T.C. 827 (S.C.). become distinguishable. In our opinion, the Judge (Revisions) was justified in hold .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X