2022 (4) TMI 1355 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Valuation - freight charges which was realized in the bills separately - will form part of the turnover ignoring the decision of the Apex Court in the case of S/s India Meters Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu 2010 (9) TMI 878 - SUPREME COURT or not? - HELD THAT - The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal of the revisionist, has relied upon the judgement rendered in the case of S/s India Meters Limited 2010 (9) TMI 878 - SUPREME COURT , which is applicable to the State of Tamilnadu and not in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh. This court concerned in this matter with the provisions of U.P. Act, which shall fall for consideration before the Tribunal also. No question of law arises as the matter is concluded by finding of fact - Revision dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of taxable turnover regarding inclusion of freight charges.
2. Applicability of previous judgments in similar cases.
3. Conflict between judgments from different jurisdictions.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in this case was the interpretation of taxable turnover concerning the inclusion of freight charges. The revisionist argued that freight charges should be included in the taxable turnover as the respondent had charged freight while making the sale. The revisionist relied on a judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court to support this argument. On the other hand, the opposite party contended that the issue had already been decided in a previous case where the court held that freight charges should not form part of the turnover. The court examined the relevant provisions and previous judgments to determine the correct interpretation.

2. The court referred to a previous judgment in Vikalp Construction Company where it was held that transportation charges should not be included in the sale price of goods. The court considered the definition of turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and explained that the cost of freight or delivery should be excluded when separately charged. The court also cited a case involving a dealer supplying material to railways, where it was established that transportation costs could not be part of the turnover if separately agreed upon. The court distinguished the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in a case from Tamilnadu, emphasizing the specific provisions of the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

3. Another crucial aspect of this case was the conflict between judgments from different jurisdictions. The Tribunal had relied on a judgment applicable to the State of Tamilnadu, while the court was concerned with the provisions of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The court clarified that the judgment from Tamilnadu was not directly applicable to the State of Uttar Pradesh. Ultimately, the court dismissed all revisions, stating that no question of law arose as the matter was concluded by the findings of fact and the judgment in Vikalp Construction Company. The court's decision highlighted the importance of considering jurisdiction-specific laws and previous judgments in tax-related matters.