1980 (9) TMI 257 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order of the Board of Revenue revising the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's orders for two assessment years.
- Claim of exemption for turnover of timber produce as agricultural produce.
- Determination of whether the appellant's activities constitute business in timber and firewood.
- Comparison of the present case with a previous judgment regarding sizing of timber for transport.
- Consideration of registration as a dealer in timber and sale of timber to buyers in Bombay.

Analysis:
The High Court of Madras heard appeals against the Board of Revenue's order revising the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decisions for two assessment years. The appellant contended that the turnover of timber produce should be exempted as agricultural produce, emphasizing their role as planters developing plantations. However, the Board of Revenue found that the appellant's activities indicated a business motive in dealing with timber and firewood. The court noted the appellant's registration as a dealer in timber, the sawing of timber into suitable sizes, and the sale of timber to buyers in Bombay. The court distinguished a previous judgment where sizing timber for transport did not constitute dealing in commercial articles unless further processed into distinct products like sleepers. The court concluded that the appellant's case differed as they engaged in activities clearly indicative of a business in timber and firewood, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

In summary, the court rejected the appellant's claim for exemption on the grounds that their activities demonstrated a clear business motive in dealing with timber and firewood. The court compared the present case with a previous judgment regarding the sizing of timber for transport, emphasizing the distinct commercial activities undertaken by the appellant, such as registration as a timber dealer and sale of timber to buyers in Bombay. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeals, upholding the Board of Revenue's decision to revise the assessment orders for the two years in question.