Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1984 (8) TMI 302

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ediately after the auction, the broker sends sale note to the assessee who is the seller indicating that the tea has been sold at a particular rate inclusive of sales tax to a particular person. Similarly he sends a bought note to the purchaser which also indicates the price the purchaser has to pay and the price is to include sales tax. Thus, both the purchaser and the seller are made aware of the fact that the price at which the tea has been auctioned includes the sales tax payable by the seller on the sale. Neither the sale note nor the bought note sent by the tea broker separately refers to the quantum of tax included in the sale price. But the sale has been made with the specific understanding that the price includes sales tax payabl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... earlier decisions, viz., Lipton (India) Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1973] 32 STC 194, State of Tamil Nadu v. Ultramarine and Pigments Ltd. [1977] 39 STC 53 and State of Tamil Nadu v. Shaw Wallace and Co. [1979] 43 STC 48 and the decision of the Patna High Court in Radha Krishna Surajmal v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1979] 43 STC 203. In more or less similar situation, this Court in Lipton (India) Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1973] 32 STC 194 held that the sales tax collected either specifically as such or as part of the sale price could be deducted from the aggregate amount paid by the purchaser. In that case, the assessee, a wholesale dealer in tea, sold consignments of tea to retail dealers throughout India at fixed wholesale rat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rately shown, the dealer could be entitled to the exclusion of that amount from the taxable turnover. The S.O. 13 issued by the Board of Revenue was as follows: "Sales tax collected as such, by a dealer from his customers should not be included in the total turnover of the dealer." In that case, even though the sale bill did not show the sales tax collected separately the court held that having regard to the fact that there was an understanding between the seller and the buyer that the amount paid by the buyer would be inclusive of the sales tax payable by the seller, the seller should be taken to have collected the inclusive price referred to in the price list which consists of the actual price portion and the sales tax portion. Though the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (India) Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1973] 32 STC 194 (Mad.) has been applied and followed in State of Tamil Nadu v. Ultramarine and Pigments Ltd. [1977] 39 STC 53 by another Division Bench of this Court. In that case also an all inclusive price was collected by the seller from the purchaser but the purchaser was aware that the all inclusive price paid by him included sales tax payable by the seller. There was also a price list which indicated that the price quoted is inclusive of sales tax. On these facts, the Court held that since the payment of sales tax was not and could not be the subject-matter of bargain between the parties, as it is a statutory liability imposed by a statute on all transactions of sales, it had to be inferred that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of sales tax collected as such. The dealer in that case claimed deduction in respect of sales tax on the ground that the value realised under the sale memos issued by him was inclusive of sales tax as all the sale memos bore the rubber stamp "including tax". When the departmental authorities rejected this claim, the assessee took the matter to the High Court and the High Court held that the Tribunal was not justified on the facts in holding that the deduction claimed by the dealer towards sales tax realised from the customers was not admissible deduction in terms of section 7(2)(a)(ii) of the Act. The court has proceeded on the basis that whether the amount shown in the sale memo included partly the value of the goods and partly sales tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates