1996 (10) TMI 379 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether under the facts and circumstances of the present case the transfer of article by the respondent-assessee to its customers under the scheme floated by it constitute a sale against payment of price of that article? Held that - Appeal allowed. All the attributes characteristics and requirements of a sale are present in the transaction. In fact the transaction is so designed and framed by the company by adopting a circuitous method for sale of their goods which amounts to nothing but a sale and the same is liable to assessment under the Act. This view is further strengthened from the fact that during the relevant assessment year the respondent-company sent articles to its various customers under the scheme of the value of Rs. 1, 36, 665 which were purchased by the respondent-company for a sum of Rs. 1, 03, 709.25 and thus earned a profit to the tune of Rs. 32, 955.75. The business so run by the respondent is with a view to earn profit out of the sale by adopting a circuitous device with a view to evade the payment of tax. Thus the High Court therefore was not justified in taking the view that it was not a sale transaction assessable to tax.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of the nature of transactions under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 relating to a company's scheme involving the sale of articles through a complex circuitous method.

Detailed Analysis:

The Supreme Court considered the appeals and special leave petitions arising from an order passed by the High Court of Madras concerning transactions under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The case involved a company's scheme where individuals paid a sum to receive coupons, which were then circulated to others in a chain leading to the purchase of articles. The Assessing Officer viewed these transactions as sales, leading to tax liability and a penalty. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld this view. However, the High Court of Madras held that the transactions did not amount to sales under the Act, overturning the previous decisions. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the transactions constituted sales for taxation purposes.

The Court emphasized that for a transaction to be considered a sale under the Sale of Goods Act, there must be an agreement for the transfer of goods' title supported by money consideration, resulting in the actual passing of goods to the purchaser. The Court noted that if the title passes without a contract between the parties or if consideration is not in the form of money, the transaction may not qualify as a sale. The Court examined the company's scheme in detail, highlighting the process where customers received coupons, circulated them, and ultimately received chosen articles. The Court observed that while there may not be a formal sale contract, an implied contract could be inferred from the parties' interactions and correspondence. The Court concluded that the scheme effectively constituted a sale, meeting all the essential criteria, and the company's actions aimed at profit-making through a circuitous method to evade tax payment.

Based on the analysis, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's decision and reinstating the orders of the assessment officers and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Court held that the transactions were indeed sales assessable under the Act, emphasizing the company's profit motive and the presence of all sale attributes in the scheme. No costs were awarded in the case.

In summary, the Supreme Court's judgment clarified that the complex scheme devised by the company for the sale of articles constituted actual sales for taxation purposes, overturning the High Court's decision. The Court's detailed analysis focused on the essential elements of a sale transaction and the company's profit-driven approach, leading to the conclusion that the transactions were subject to tax assessment under the Act.