Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1981 (3) TMI 223

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nenforceable?" The facts which have given rise to these references are that the respondents are a registered dealer and have also been certified by the Commissioner of Sales Tax for the purposes of entry 39 to Notification No. STA. 1059-(iii)-G-1 dated 28th December, 1959, issued under section 41(1) of the said Act as registered dealers who manufacture cotton fabrics of the type mentioned in the said entry. The respondents, however, did not themselves manufacture in its ordinary sense, that is, did not make cloth themselves. The respondents' business consists of buying grey cloth in the market and then dyeing and printing it and thereafter selling it in the market. They also do job-work of dyeing and printing cloth made by others for sale .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 9. Clause (17) of section 2 of the said Act defines the term "manufacture". The said definition is as follows: " 'Manufacture', with all its grammatical variations and cognate expressions, means producing, making, extracting, altering, ornamenting, finishing or otherwise processing, treating, or adapting any goods; but does not include such manufactures or manufacturing processes as may be prescribed." It is obvious that dyeing and printing would be a process carried out on cloth and would result in a new marketable commodity coming into existence (see Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Dunken Coffee Manufacturing Co.[1975] 35 S.T.C. 493. and Hiralal Jitmal v. Commissioner of Sales Tax[1957] 8 S.T.C. 325. It is not disputed before us by Mr. Jet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 52 of 1978-Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Jasmine Mills Pvt. Ltd.[1981] 47 S.T.C. 357. -decided on 2nd March, 1981, this Court has held that manufacture for sale could be goods of the purchasing dealer himself or on behalf of some other person who gets his goods manufactured by the purchasing dealer for the purpose of sale. In the result, the question which the Tribunal decided did not actually arise for its determination in any of the above references and accordingly for us to answer the said question in any of these references would be academic. We, therefore, decline to answer the question referred to us in these references and direct these references to be returned to the Tribunal. The applicant will pay to the respondents the costs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates