9911796707
TMI Blog1953 (4) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h in Ramtek tahsil and at Kamptee. In addition, there are several places where his bidis are manufactured. The bidis are collected and stored either at Kamptee or at the two additional places of business in Ramtek tahsil for despatch outside the State in fulfilment of the orders received at the head office. The assessee has also a branch shop at Mandsaur in Gwalior State. Bidis which were originally despatched from this State were also distributed by that shop to some of the customers in that area. Orders for the supply of bidis used to be received directly at the head office or at Mandsaur shop. Goods used to be consigned to the customers by railway. The railway receipts and bills were sent to the consignee either through a bank or V.P.P. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lace in this province." 6.. The alternative stand 9f the assessee was that the sales amount- ing to Rs. 97,945-10-0 should have been excluded from the taxable turn- over as orders covering them were received prior to the 1st of June, 1947, when the Act came into force. The Tribunal held that the con- tracts of sale were made during the quarter in question when the orders were accepted and goods actually despatched. It upheld the finding of the Sales Tax Commissioner. The item of Rs. 1,890-11-6 included in the taxable turnover by the Assistant Commissioner was excluded. 7.. The third contention of the assessee was that the packing charges amounting to Rs. 23,157-6-0 and an amount of Rs. 250 on account of dharmada should not be included in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as follows: "Whether the recovery of sales tax is illegal and whether the assessee is entitled to its refund, in view of the decision in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 258 of 1951 decided on the 25th April, 1952, by this Honour- able Court.(1)" 9.. This case relates to the assessment for the period ending the 12th November, 1947. The decision in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 258 of 1951 does not hold that the sales tax recovered for this period is illegal or is liable to be refunded. The learned Counsel has not advanced any grounds to entitle the applicant to a refund of the tax paid by him. This question was not raised before the Sales Tax Authorities and was not raised before the Board of Revenue. We do not think that the question (1) [19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Board of Revenue to refer all questions of law arising out of its order whether they are stated by the applicant in his application under Section 23(1) or not. The provision does not require him to state such questions. He simply points out such questions. The Board of Revenue must consider whether a question of law brought to its notice during the hearing of the case arises or not. No limitation is prescribed for the purpose. 13.. Under these circumstances, we hold that the order of the Board of Revenue rejecting the application under Section 23 (1) is not correct, and require the Tribunal to state the case and the question of law arising out of its order dated the 14th December, 1951. 14.. The application is allowed with costs. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
