9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 965X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all be done by the Assessing Authority expeditiously, but not later than six months from the date a copy of the order is received by it. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tery having been held to be in essence a chance for a prize, the sale of a lottery ticket can only be a sale of that chance. There is no other element. Every right can be sub-divided into lesser rights. When these lesser rights culminate in a legally recognizable right, it is the latter which defines the right. The right to participate in the draw is a part of the composite right of the chance to win and it does not feature separately in the definition of the word 'lottery'. It is an implicit part of the chance to win. It is not a different right. The separation is specious since neither of the rights can stand without the other. A draw without a chance to win is meaningless and one cannot claim a prize without participating in the draw. In fact the transfer of the chance to win assumes participation in the draw. . . 48.. There is no value in the mere right to participate in the draw and the purchaser does not pay for the right to participate. The consideration is paid for the chance to win. There is, therefore, no distinction between the two rights. The right to participate being an inseparable part of the chance to win is, therefore, part of an actionable claim. . . . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im. The Assessing Authority including the Tribunal, in the instant cases, had levied tax on the face value of the lottery ticket, keeping in view the provisions of section 45(1) read with Schedule G to the VAT Act, and thereby committed a mistake apparent on the face of the record rendering the assessment unsustainable. It was submitted that if the law declared in the case of H. Anraj [1986] 61 STC 165 (SC); AIR 1986 SC 63 was to be applied in the present cases, the Assessing Authority shall have to necessarily assess the sale in question by suitably splitting the value of the lottery ticket into what was taxable and what was not. This exercise had not been undertaken by the Assessing Authority obviously because the assessment order proceeded on the basis of the provisions contained in Schedule G of VAT Act which gave a totally different touchstone for such assessment. It was urged that while the present bunch of cases did not relate to the period post-decision in Sunrise Associates' case [2006] 3 VST 151 (SC); [2006] 145 STC 576 (SC); AIR 2006 SC 1908, for the period prior to the said decision, the matter shall have to be remitted back to the Assessing Authority for passing an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could be levied on that part of the sale of lottery ticket which amounted to a sale or transfer of goods. We have given our careful consideration to the submissions made at the bar. The material facts are not in dispute. It is not in dispute that the Assessing Authority has in the instant cases held the petitioners liable to pay sales tax on the face value of the lottery tickets taking into consideration the provisions of section 45(1) and Schedule G of the VAT Act. It is also not in dispute that any such assessment would, in the light of the law declared by the Supreme Court in H. Anraj's case [1986] 61 STC 165; AIR 1986 SC 63, be bad having regard to the fact that the Supreme Court has in the said case declared only a part of the sale transaction to be tantamount to transfer of goods while the rest is not. The legal position post Sunrise Associates' case [2006] 3 VST 151 (SC); [2006] 145 STC 576 (SC); AIR 2006 SC 1908, however, is totally different inasmuch as the Supreme Court has declared that the sale of lottery ticket is in no way sale of goods but keeping in view the fact that the said decision has been held to be operative only prospectively, the law as declared b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
