9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (8) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stitute minor forest produce. The sale price for the period during which the petitioner was entitled to collect the aforesaid minor forest produce was fixed at Rs. 2,500 for shikakai and Rs. 1,300 for baibidang as is apparent from annexure E-2 to the writ petition. 2.. In pursuance of the contract, the petitioner collected shikakai and baibidang and ultimately sold them in the market. The Sales Tax Officer was of the view that the turnover representing the sale proceeds of shikakai and baibidang by the petitioner in the market, was liable to be taxed under the Act. The case of the petitioner, on the other hand, was that he had already paid the sales tax to the Divisional Forest Officer, respondent No. 2, for being paid to the Sales Tax Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rementioned amounts on days mentioned in the deed of agreement. 4.. In para 9 of the writ petition, it has specifically been stated that the Divisional Forest Officer, Central Bastar Division, Jagdalpur, respondent No. 2, had collected sales tax on the amount of sale price for which the contract had been entered into. This submission has not been denied in the return. Consequently, it is established that on the price for which shikakai and baibidang were sold to the petitioner by the forest department, sales tax had already been paid by the petitioner. 5.. It is not disputed that sales tax of the said commodity is a single point taxation to be paid at the time of first sale. The Sales Tax Officer, however, took the view that the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to, namely, making cuts on the trees and thereafter the liquid which oozes out, is collected. In this view of the matter it is apparent that in the case of Anandilal [1968] 22 STC 19 (MP) there was no sale of forest produce in the sense that the said produce was available for being collected and taken away. 7.. Indeed the contract, as held in the aforesaid case, was in effect a licence granted to the petitioner to enter on the forest land for extraction and collection of gum from the trees. This is not so in the instant case. Here the goods, namely, shikakai and baibidang constitute by themselves, minor forest produce and are not the result of some operation which is necessary to be performed as in the case of gum. 8.. Shikakai and bai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
