9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (12) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, 1948 as it stood during the relevant year 1974-75 in view of the fact that the amendment to section 2(c) was retrospective? Held that:- Appeal allowed by way of remand. As this aspect of the amendment had not been considered by the High Court in the judgment under appeal. The amendment gives an artificial definition of "manufacture". This has to be considered. This question also requires con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring Works, the respondent (hereinafter referred to as "the assessee") was a dealer in iron and steel. During the assessment year 1974-75, which is in dispute, the assessee had sold iron shafts worth Rs. 3,30,600.03. Treating such iron shafts as machinery parts, the assessee had deposited tax on this at the rate of 4 per cent. During the assessment proceedings, however, the contention of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ufacturing process and so the turnover of shafts is liable to be taxed in the hands of the assessee. A similar controversy came up for consideration before this Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Nirankari Engineering, Kanpur 1979 UPTC 1125. It was held in that case that cutting of iron bars into small pieces does not change its nature and the iron shafts will remain within the category of ir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. ORDER This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court of Allahabad, dated 26th October, 1987. The question was, whether the dealer being the respondent herein was liable to pay sales tax at the rate of 7 per cent in view of the amended provisions of section 3-A as well as the definition of "manufacture" in section 2(e-1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 as it stood dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
