9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (8) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant Commissioner as well as by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in appeal. The dealer has now come before this Court in revision. The findings of the authorities below show the nature of the transaction. The appellant had with him certain designs embroidered on silk cloth. These embroidered pieces were sold to customers and in the bills the particular description of the embroidery is given and a price is fixed according to the weight of the zari. There was no evidence, which would support the claim of the assessee that the customer supplied the cloth for these embroidered pieces. The assessee himself is a cloth merchant, and it is quite possible that the customer who buys cloth from him will also buy his ready-made zari embroidered pieces, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dered pieces, and that the embroidery did not alter the nature of the substance as the cloth. We are unable to agree. Kailash Nath v. State of U.P.(1) dealt with a special notification exempting from sales tax cotton cloth or yarn manufactured in Uttar Pradesh subject to the condition that the cloth or yarn was actually exported from Uttar Pradesh State. The assessees sold cotton cloth manufactured by them to their constituents, who thereafter dyed and printed such cloth with hand-made apparatus and exported them as hand-printed cloth. The Supreme Court held that, though the colour of the cloth had changed by printing and processing, the cloth exported was the same as the cloth sold by the petitioner, and that they were entitled to the exem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, therefore, no question of exemption of assessment of the sales under item 4 of the Third Schedule to the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, which excludes from its scope pure silk cloth. Learned counsel for the petitioner as a final argument referred to item 19 of the First Schedule to the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, which provides zari, as an item of goods assessable at the point of first sale in the State. According to the learned counsel, the sales in this case are subsequent sales and therefore they would be exempt, but the fallacy in this argument lies in the fact that what was sold is not zari. It is zari thread embroidered into attractive designs or patterns on silk cloth. The customer has paid in these cases not for zar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
