9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (7) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x on sales outside the State of Bihar made under the approval of its principal, the sugar company, when the company itself, according to the arrangements, had shown the said sales as taxable in its return and has paid tax thereon." The facts, which may be conveniently stated from the statement of the case, are these. The assessee was assessed to sales tax under section 13 of the Act for the last quarter of 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50. Three separate assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee took up three appeals to the Deputy Commissioner. Before the Deputy Commissioner, the assessee challenged the legality of the levy of sales tax in respect of such of the transactions of sale in which he alleged to have acted a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... half of the assessee was that the company owning the two sugar factories had shown the said sales as taxable in its return and had paid tax thereon. Therefore, the assessee was not liable to pay tax twice on such sales. The contention was rejected by the learned Member, Board of Revenue. From the facts stated in detail in that order, it would appear that the goods were despatched by the company showing the assessee undoubtedly and undisputedly as consignee in the railway receipts, if not the consignor as was stated in the appellate order of the Deputy Commissioner. The railway receipts were sent to the assessee by the company and were endorsed by the former in favour of the buyers outside the State of Bihar-the sales to whom are the subject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osition to perform their duties. In other words, while acting as an agent on the principal's behalf, he guarantees the performance by the persons with whom he deals on behalf of his principal and makes himself liable as a surety to the extent of any default which may be committed by such persons. The primary liability of the persons entering into the transaction through the instrumentality of del credere agent with his principal remains. The liability of the del credere agent becomes co-extensive with that of the third parties who enter into contract through him. The del credere agent is not the agent of those third parties. Here, in this case, on the facts stated by the Board, it does not appear that the liability of the assessee was co-ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that the company has shown the transactions as part of its sale in its return and paid sales tax on them cannot lead to the inference that the assessee is not liable to pay sales tax on these transactions. The Board has rightly refrained from going into the question whether the transaction between the company and the assessee was a sale or not within the meaning of the Act, as in this case it was not relevant to do so. But we find no error in the view that the nature of the transaction as between the assessee and the purchasers was clear enough to lead to the legal inference that it was a sale by the assessee liable to tax under the Act. 6.. From our discussion of the point with reference to the facts stated in the revisional order of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
