Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1959 (9) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s to the turnover in respect of the goods tanned at Chittoor after 1st October, 1953. The contention of the assessee was that the hides and skins, though purchased in the State, if tanned outside the State, would be liable to be taxed only under the provisions of rule 16(4) of the (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, that is, at the stage of sale by the first dealer after they were tanned, and that, or in the present case, the tanned goods were exported to foreign countries, no tax could be levied by reason of Article 286 of the Constitution. Neither the Commercial Tax Officer nor the Appellate Tribunal accepted this contention. The Appellate Tribunal held that the hides and skins purchased while in a raw condition in this State would be liable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... me. We do not consider that, in order to render a person liable as a tanner, he should personally tan the goods; nor is it necessary that he should tan them in a tannery either owned by him or in which he had an interest. Recently, we had to consider the latter part of the question in T.R.C. No. 64 of 1956* where we held that a person who tans in the course of his business raw hides and skins bought by him, in a tannery which was not his, would be liable to be assessed in respect of the raw hides and skins purchased as a tanner. The conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal is, therefore, correct. On the second question, the case for the assessee was that, after 1st October, 1953, 20,622 skins were tanned at Chittoor, which since that date becam .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... kins have been tanned in a tannery which is exempt from taxation under section 3(3), the sale of such Since reported as Sri Jey Cherish and Co., Ltd. v. The State of Madras [1960] 11 S.T.C. 353. hides or skins shall be liable to taxation as under the next sub-rule below dealing with hides or skins tanned outside the State. (4) Sales by licensed dealers in hides or skins which have been tanned outside the State shall be exempt from taxation except at the stage of sale by the dealer who is the first dealer not exempt from taxation under section 3(3) who sells them within the State. The tax shall be levied from such dealer on the amount for which he sells such hides or skins." Under section 5(vi) of the Act, in respect of sale of hides and s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , rule 16(4) being applied to cases where it was tanned outside. The tax under the Act is on the transaction of sale. Under section 5(vi), in regard to sale of hides and skins, whether tanned or untanned, the tax shall be levied only at such single point as may be prescribed. It is unnecessary to consider, for the purpose of the present case, whether untanned hides and skins become in law different after being tanned so as to entitle the State to tax both of them without infringing the rule as to single point levy. We shall proceed on the assumption that they are the same for the purposes of application of section 5(vi), and that levy at one point would preclude levy at another point in the series of sales. Rules 16(2) prescribes the levy .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ate, the levy would have to be only under rule 16(2). The rule as to single point levy would not be contravened if rule 16(4) is held to apply only to cases not covered by rule 16(2). We agree with the Appellate Tribunal that the assessee has been properly assessed under rule 16(2). The revision petition fails and is dismissed with costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 100. T.R.C. No. 70 of 1957.-This revision petition relates to the assessment to sales tax for the year 1952-53. The only question raised in this case is whether a tanner, who purchased untanned hides and skins but did not tan the same in his own factory, would be liable to be taxed. This point is covered by our decision in T.R.C. No. 64 of 1956.* The conclusion that the turnover in res .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates