9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (5) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsp; Dated 23-7-1980 To M/s Raj Trading Co., PHIPSON & CO. LTD. Governorpet, Vijayawada-2 (A.P) Registered Office : 6, Old Court House Street, Calcutta-700 001 &nbs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... --------- Three Kalyani I.P. No. 686/79-80 d/11-7-80 Expass No. 31 (Bond-Export)/80-81 d/18-7-80 T/R. No. 4004 d/18-7-80 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Per Roadways India Corp. Received in full and in Day Book Fol. No. Freight To pay good condition Ledger Fol. No. -" " D.S.O. No. CT/1 1084 Date 23-7-1980 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbsp; --------- 620 Doz. Qts. Kalyani B/L Beer To go with Ch. 1117 d/ 23-7-1980 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Per................ Received in full Day Book Fol. No............... Freight............ and in good condition Ledger Fol. No................." The Income-tax Officer held that the amounts represented by way of deposit on bottles will not form part of the purchase price of the liquor and as such disallowed the following amounts for the years under appeal : Asst. year Amount 1981-82 Rs. 7,900 1982-83 & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is made. In this case, there has been no physical transfer of funds by the assessee as deposit. Only a debit or invoice is raised by the supplier towards the deposit for bottle which in fact represents the cost of the bottle. For a deposit to be made by the purchaser to the supplier, there should be an agreement stipulating certain rate of interest in favour of the depositor and also the conditions under which the deposit becomes non-refundable or refundable. No such thing has taken place in the case of the assessee. If it were a deposit against the bottles, ipso facto it would mean that the bottles are returnable to the supplier and only in respect of bottles not returned the deposit can be appropriated towards the cost of such bottles retained by the assessee. As a matter of fact, bottles are never returned either by the assessee to its suppliers or by the assessee's customers to the assessee. This is not a case where the assessee received liquor in barrels for sale in retail outlets in driblets. The assessee received the liquor in bottles which are to be sold lock, stock and barrel. Therefore, merely because the supplier chose wrong description of the cost of bottles as a depos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng. 4. Shri P. Radhakrishna Murty, learned departmental representative, agreed that liquors are purchased in bottles and are sold is bottles. The supplier also has subsequently clarified that the deposits are not deposits but represent the cost of the bottles. However, the confusion could have been avoided if such a clarification had been made much earlier. He anyway expressed a doubt whether at this stage of the proceedings such a clarification could be made by the assessee. 5. Having regard to the submissions made before us and the materials on record, we uphold the contention of the assessee. The assessee is a wholesaler-cum-retailer. It does not get the liquor in drums or barrels for sale in driblets. The assessee get the consignment only in crates of bottles containing the liquors which are sold either in wholesale or in retail to its customers. The liquor goes along with the bottle and it goes against common sense to divorce the contents from the container at the point of sale though at the point of consumption such separation is essential. Though the assessee received two invoices or debit notes - one for the liquor pure and simple and another for the bottles - the latter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
