1951 (11) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmissioner-rejected the applicant's claim for exclusion of this sum from the taxable turnover. The Commissioner, in appeal, maintained the rejection of the claim and the result is this application for revision of the Commissioner's order. It may be added that the assessment relates to the very first quarter after the coming into force of the Act. 2.. The learned counsel for the applicant has confined himself practically to one single argument. He points out that where the paper is provided by the customer, the transaction of supply to him of the printed goods (the paper supplied by the customer with the printing done on it by the applicant) is not assessed to tax. In his view, the supply of the paper by the applicant-printer should make n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to the customer is not merely the intangible effect or outcome of the printer's work, but also the property in the paper on which such work has been done and which, at no time in the past, belonged to the customer. The printed goods as the paper with the printing done on it may be called-clearly come within the definition of goods contained in Section 2(d). The conclusion is, therefore, in escapable that in the first type of transaction where the paper is supplied by the customer, there has been no sale and that in the second type of transaction, where the paper is provided by the printer, there has been a sale. 4.. Next, let us consider the argument that in the second type of transaction, the printer should be regarded as being no more .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e price of the printed goods should be included in the taxable turnover. 5.. In coming to these conclusions, we are fortified by the decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada and of the Privy Council in the cases of the The King v. Dominion Press Limited(1), and Dominion Press Limited v. Minister of Customs and Excise(2). The Supreme Court of Canada held that the job printer, whose work consists in executing special orders for customers, but who procures the material upon which such orders are to be executed, is a manufacturer selling a product and his business is not a lease or hire of work and services. The questions put to the printers in this case and their answers suggest a similarity to the contentions raised on behalf of the applica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X