9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (7) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if as a result of the answers to this reference the tax liability on the assessee is reduced, the penalty under section 17(3) should be correspondingly reduced?" 2.. The present reference arises on the following facts: The petitioner is a marketing society registered under the M.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. It is running a rice mill and it is registered as a dealer. It was being assessed to sales tax for the period from 1st July, 1964, to 30th June, 1965. It was assessed to purchase tax under section 7(1) read with section 8(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The tax was imposed on a total purchase of Rs. 35,81,029.06 and, in addition, penalty of Rs. 8,000 was imposed under section 17(3) of the Act for failing to submit three quarterly returns. 3.. There are primary service societies, which are registered under the M.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, of which the agriculturists are members. The primary service societies advance loans to their members and in return, the members instead of repaying the loan in cash, supply paddy to the petitioner-marketing society. The primary service societies and some others are also members of the petitioner-marketing socie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fered an explanation before the taxing authorities, which was rejected on the ground that no sufficient cause was made out. It was open to the taxing authority to come to its own conclusions upon the material on record and as no illegality or irregularity is demonstrated to have been committed by the taxing authority, this question does not involve any question of law, but it is purely a finding of fact. We, therefore, refuse to answer the question on the ground that this is a pure question of fact and, consequently, such a question could not have been referred to us for our opinion. Question No. (4).-This question depends on the answer to question No. (3). As such, there is no occasion for reduction of the tax liability of the petitioner. For this reason there would be no question of the penalty under section 17(3) of the Act being correspondingly reduced. Therefore, this question does not at all arise for consideration in view of our answer to question No. (3). 5.. The only other question to be considered in the present reference would be question No. (2), regarding the liability of the petitioner for purchase tax. The learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the transaction, but it is open to the petitioner to adopt another line of reasoning in respect of the same question. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the question was raised by the petitioner before the Tribunal by adopting another line of reasoning, but not advancing the line of reasoning that is now sought to be advanced before us. It is always open to this court to consider any other line of reasoning, which may not have been advanced before the Tribunal. Therefore, without even invoking the principle laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd.[1961] 42 I.T.R. 589 (S.C.); A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1633., we are of the opinion that the petitioner can certainly be permitted to raise the question, which was raised before the Tribunal and which was specifically decided by the Tribunal. As such, the question does arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal and the mere fact that another line of reasoning might be advanced would not detract from that position. Therefore, we permitted the learned counsel for the petitioner to exhaustively discuss the nature of the transaction from any angle he likes. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch goods in any manner other than by way of sale in the State or despatches them to a place outside the State except as a direct result of sale or purchase in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, then only, in that event, the exemption would be granted. 8.. We may further observe that there should, in fact, be a transfer of goods for cash or for deferred payment. Therefore, it is in the light of the said provisions that we have to ascertain the nature of the transactions entered between the petitioner-society and the agriculturists, who are members of the primary service societies. The method of working has already been detailed by us in paragraph 3 of this order. The method is as follows: The primary service societies advance loans to their members, who are all agriculturists. As such, the agriculturists are indebted to the primary service society. What is provided further is the method of repayment of the loans. The agriculturists are not required to repay the loans in cash, but the agreement is that they should supply paddy to the petitioner-marketing society. It is to be noted that the primary service societies alone are not members of the petitioner-marketing society ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of section 2(j) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. (2) That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, purchase tax under section 7 of the Act was rightly levied on the paddy delivered by the members of service societies to the assessee for which payment was made by the assessee to the service societies, who adjusted the payment against the loan advanced by the service societies to the respective members. (3) That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the question of sufficient cause was a pure question of fact and, for that reason, we decline to answer the same on the ground that a question of law alone could have been referred to us for our opinion. Consequently, there was no sufficient cause within the meaning of section 17(3) of the Act for late filing of three quarterly returns. (4) In view of our answer to question No. (3), this question does not arise for consideration at all. 10.. Let the case be remitted to the Board of Revenue for acting in accordance with the opinion given by us. The petitioner shall bear the costs of the reference, including the respondent's costs and counsel's fee shall be Rs. 100. Reference answered accordi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
