9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (1) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bags were not covered by the said entry?" The facts giving rise to this question are as follows: The respondentfirm is a manufacturer of chikki and farsan and is a registered dealer under the said Act. It appears that the respondent sold the chikki made by it in the following four ways: (1) loose, (2) in ordinary paper packing, (3) inserting the paper packed chikki in heat-sealed polythene bags, and (4) putting chikki in cardboard box and inserting it in heat-sealed polythene bags. In respect of the assessment period from 13th November, 1966, to 2nd November, 1967, the Sales Tax Officer, in effect, held that the chikki sold by the respondent in the manner described in categories (3) and (4) set out aforesaid was sold in sealed containers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us by way of the question raised. Before going to the contentions raised it may be useful to refer to the entries in question. Briefly stated, entry 31 of Schedule C to the said Act refers to sweets and sweetmeats except when sold in sealed containers of weight not exceeding five kilograms in each container. Entry 6 of Schedule E covers food-stuffs and food provisions of all kinds when sold in sealed containers of weight not exceeding five kilograms in each container but excluding certain items with which we are not concerned here. Very briefly stated the question here is whether the polythene bags into which the paper-packed chikki or the cardboard boxes containing the chikki were inserted and which polythene bags were heat-sealed can be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal in Bombay Traders (Appeal No. 131 of 1968 decided on 30th September, 1969). In that matter a reference was made to the High Court and the same was decided by us in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bombay Traders[1976] 38 S.T.C. 286.'. In that case, the assessees bought plain cashew-nuts in tins and after frying and applying spices to the cashew-nuts to make them tasty, packed them in plastic bags and sold them locally. The Tribunal gave a finding to the effect that the packets in which the cashew-nuts were packed could be opened and closed again. We have taken the view that the cashew-nuts were not sold by the assessees in sealed containers, observing that there was grave doubt about the factual correctness of the conclusion reach ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had to them without in any manner breaking any portion of the cover. It is not necessary for a container to be a sealed container that to get access to its contents, the container or cover has to be broken by removing the fastening although it would be the most common method of opening a sealed container. All that is necessary for a container to be a sealed container is that access cannot be had to its contents without breaking the fastening or some portion of the container. In the present case, the observations of the Tribunal clearly suggest that in order to get at the contents of the polythene bags in which the chikki was packed by the respondent, some portion thereof had to be removed although this could be done by fingers. It is, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
