TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 855X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02 but returned in 2002-03 are entitled to be excluded for computation of gross turnover under rule 159 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995. In the assessment of tax of the petitioner for the period of the fourth quarter ending March 31, 2003 completed on June 26, 2005, the assessing officer added back to the gross turnover: (a) the amount of commission received by the dealer for the reasons that the incentive given by the manufacturer to compensate the loss for the sale at a price lower than the purchase price on allowing deduction in the sale price is nothing but a sale price of the goods; and (b) the amount of returned goods was not relevant to the stock-in-trade for the assessment year f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the authorities below as aforesaid, the petitioner filed this application reiterating the grounds of appeal and asserting that the commission or discount received by the dealer was not treated in the profit and loss account because it was neither profit nor loss. By a supplementary affidavit the petitioner produced copies of the statement of special discounts received and some other documents in support of receipt thereof. The respondents appearing through the learned State Representative contested the application by supporting the impugned order though did not file the affidavit-in-opposition. The revisional authority disposed of the application ex parte. The proviso to rule 247 of the WBST Rules, 1995 provides, where the applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tively, of the Division Bench of the honourable Madras High Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Indian Cable Company Ltd. reported in [1984] 56 STC 192, of the honourable Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. v. Rita Sales Corporation reported in [1986] 61 STC 240, of the Division Bench of the honourable Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Fertiliser Corporation of India Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer (OFA), Punjagutta Division reported in [1991] 83 STC 129, of the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ernakulam v. Kerala Rubber Allied Products [1993] 90 STC 170 and of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in the case of Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... price' in section 2(h) of the Act does not expressly provide for the deduction of trade discount, from the sale price. As the sale price is arrived at after deducting the trade discount, no question of deduction from the sale price of any sum by way of trade discount arises. Having regard to the nature of trade discount, there is only one sale price between the wholesale dealer and the retailer, and that is the price payable by the retailer calculated as the difference between the catalogue price and the trade discount. There is only one contract between the parties, the contract being that the goods will be supplied by the wholesale dealer to the retailer at the aforesaid sale price. Therefore, the trade discount cannot be included in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Pradesh High Court held that the reimbursement received from the manufacturer-principal would not form part of sale price as defined under section 2(o) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. In the impugned assessment order, the difference of Rs. 12,28,806 between the value of the goods and sale value of the goods, as calculated by the assessing officer was allowed in the assessment order. So, the amount of commission received on purchase not having been treated as amount deductions given by the petitioner on sale, the aforesaid decisions cited by the petitioners, have no relevance on the fact of this case. The copies of the documents annexed with the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner evidenced the grant of specia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may while furnishing return under rule 152, rule 153 or rule 154 as the goods may be deduct from his gross turnover of sales of goods (i) sale price of the goods so return in respect of which due tax has been paid by the dealer during the earlier period referred to in clause (a). The 'period' referred to in this rule means 'return period'. So, according to the provisions of rule 159, the petitioner unlike for the entire sum as claimed, was entitled to deduction of the sale price of the goods so returned in respect of which due tax was paid by him during the earlier return period provided the goods were returned during any subsequent return period following the return period in which such goods were sold. The learned asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
