9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er at Rs. 10,15,711. In doing so, the assessing authority negatived the claim for deduction of the transport charges made by the appellant under rule 6(c)(i) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), on the ground that the blue-metal was delivered by the appellant at the site of the buyer and the sale price included transport charges incurred prior to sale, and therefore could not be deducted under rule 6(c)(i) of the Rules. The inclusion of the transport charges in the taxable turnover was objected to by the appellant in its appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, before whom the appellant produced its books of account as well as affidavits obtained from persons to whom the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the blue-metal had to be supplied at a fixed price and that the transport charges specified had also to be paid separately and that there was no consolidated contract for the sale of blue-metal at the site. Apart from placing reliance upon the affidavits given by the buyers to the effect that the transport charges were charged for and paid separately, the appellant also contended that there was a post-sale agreement for payment of transport charges which varied from transaction to transaction depending upon the place of the buyer. The Board relied upon an order book stated to have been maintained by the dealer and concluded that the sale was complete when the goods were delivered at the site of the buyer and this would show that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakrishna Brick Works v. State of Tamil Nadu [1982] 49 STC 251, Ramco Cement Distribution Company (P.) Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1982] 51 STC 171 and Vadivel Mudaliar and Sons v. State of Tamil Nadu [1983] 52 STC 189. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader contended that really there are no two separate and independent bargains, but that the transaction is a composite one for the supply of blue-metal by delivery at the site, and therefore, no exclusion of the turnover referable to transport charges can be availed of by the appellant under rule 6(c)(i) of the Rules. Strong reliance was also placed on the judgment in State of Tamil Nadu by the Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Madras Division, Madras-6 v. Rajasthan Tradin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ances of delivery of blue-metal ex-quarry. But the Board had not referred to any of them. It is also seen from the invoice book that in case the delivery of the blue-metal has to be effected at site, the cost of the bluemetal is separately indicated in the bill and sales tax is also collected by the appellant only on the value of the blue-metal supplied and with reference to the transport charges, it is charged for and indicated in the bill by the appellant without its being included in the price of the goods sold. In other words, the pattern of the transactions as disclosed by the invoices in this case would establish that with reference to the supply of blue-metal by the appellant, normally the delivery is ex-quarry, but that in the event ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in respect of freight on the ground that it had been separately charged for. This was rejected by all the authorities as well as the High Court. While dealing with the claim for exemption, the Supreme Court pointed out that factually the railway freight had been included in the price and had been later deducted, and therefore, it would be outside the terms of rule 5(1)(g) which required that in order to enable a dealer to claim the deduction, it should be charged for separately and not included in the price of the goods sold. Such is not the case here, and therefore, this decision cannot be of any assistance to the State. The principle of the decision in Dyer Meakin Breweries Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1970] 26 STC 248 (SC) is also, in our ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt at a particular price, the circumstances that the dealer had cut up the price into separate items would not enable the dealer to get deduction of the freight from the total taxable turnover. Even this decision is inapplicable in this case, where, as already seen, there are two independent and separate bargains disclosed by the bill books and the invoices and the other materials, one relating to the supply of blue-metal and the other in respect of delivery of the blue-metal at the place of the customer on payment of charges billed for separately and not included in the price. No doubt, State of Tamil Nadu, by the Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Madras Division, Madras-6 v. Rajasthan Trading Corporation, Madras-17 (T.C. No. 306 of 1971 dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
