9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... freight and handling charges. This excess amount was considered by the assessing officer as the charges made by the dealer-opposite party under the other heads and shall form part of the sale price. Without setting aside the finding recorded by the two authorities below to it, the Tribunal assumed that the said amount of ₹ 6,58,316 was towards the labour charges/insurance. The order of the Tribunal is far from satisfactory as it does not contain any reason as to whether the freight charged by the dealer-opposite party amounting to ₹ 6,58,316 was charged towards the labour charges/insurance charges. Revision allowed. - 613 of 2000 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2008 - PRAKASH KRISHNA , J. PRAKASH KRISHNA J. The dealer-opposite part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appearing on behalf of the dealer-opposite party, submits that since the above amount was charged separately in the bill it shall not form part of the sale price as defined under section 2(h) of the Act. Considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The controversy in the present revision revolves around the interpretation of section 2(h) of the Central Sales Tax Act. For the sake of convenience the said section is reproduced below: 2. (h) 'sale price' means the amounts payable to a dealer as consideration for the sale of any goods, less any sum allowed as cash discount according to the practice normally prevailing in the trade, but inclusive of any sum charged for any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the cost of installation in case where such costs is separately charged'. Therefore, 'any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before the delivery thereof' is to be regarded as part of 'sale price', even if it does not fall within the first part of the definition. But there is an exception carved out of this inclusion. Not all sums charged for something done by dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before delivery thereof are covered by the inclusive clause. The cost of freight or delivery or the cost of installation certainly represents an amount charged for transportation or installation of the goods at the time of or before the delivery thereof and would, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee. It is only where the cost of freight is separately charged that it would fall within the exclusion clause and in the context of the definition as a whole, it is obvious that the '. . . cost of freight . . . is separately charged' is used in contradistinction to a case where the cost of freight is not separately charged but is included in the price. It is not intended to apply to a case where the cost of freight is part of the price of the dealer chooses to split up the price and claim the amount of freight as a separate item in the invoice. Where the cost of freight is part of the price, it would fall within the first part of the definition and to such a case, the exclusion clause in the second part has no application. On co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the teeth of the judgment of the apex court referred to above. The said judgment of the apex court has been constantly followed in Cement Marketing Co. of India Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore [1980] 45 STC 197; AIR 1980 SC 346, Cement Marketing Co. of India Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore AIR 1980 SC 807, TVL Ramco Cement Distribution Co. Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu v. State of Tamil Nadu [1993] 88 STC 151; AIR 1993 SC 123. The learned counsel for the dealer-opposite party has placed reliance upon the following decisions: (1) Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law) v. McDowell Co. Limited [1980] 46 STC 79 (Ker), (2) Seshasayee Industries Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1994] 92 STC 565 (Mad), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
