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

2014 (5) TMI 133

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is just incidental. The mere fact that the labels or logos have been printed would not make the transaction into a works contract - It is purely and simply a sale of goods - Therefore, printing of the logo or name is incidental to the sale and the transaction between the customer and the supplier is not work charged - Except for contending that the transaction is one of works contract, the assessee had not placed any material before any of the authorities - When the primary object of the transaction is sale of bags and the printing of the name or logo is only incidental to the sale, there was no justifiable ground to accept the case of the assessee and hold that the transaction is sale alone – decided against assessee. - Tax Case (Re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed products and that the proportion was unexplained. Thus, the Assessing Officer proposed best of judgment assessment. The assessee was granted time to file objections and admittedly, the assessee had filed objections on 02.02.1989. On consideration of the contention of the assessee that the sale of bags carrying the customers name was only "works contract", the Officer held that in the returns filed, no where, such claim was made and there were no records to show that the transaction was only works contract. On the merits of the assessment, the Assessing Officer pointed out that the assessee had not given any material evidence as regards the waste emanating from its manufacture and the assessee had admitted purchase omission; in the absenc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case Tvl. Bharat Offset, rep. By its Partner and others Vs. The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, rep. By its Registrar, Chennai reported in 34 VST 342. While considering the amendment brought to Entry 52 of the First Schedule, Part C to the TNGST Act, relating to enlisting of printed materials as items of taxation, this Court considered a similar question as raised in this Tax Case Revision. Even though the decision of this Court reported in above cited case related to the entry, yet this Court considered the decision in the case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Anantham Viswanathan (cited supra) holding that printing of the name in the bags sold is only incidental to the purchase of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... am Viswanathan case (cited supra), this Court in paragraph No.19, held as follows:- "19. We have already referred to the tests spelt out in the various decisions. The decision in Anandam Viswanathan's case (supra) cannot be automatically applied to all transactions where printing materials are supplied. There, what was transferred in the transaction was the property in "the questions" which belonged to the University. The white sheets are meaningless without the questions being printed. The question is, whether the property belonged to the Universities. The printer was merely asked to print what is required by the University. The University has no intention to purchase the papers. It places an order for printing of questions. The Universi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... act that the Entry was the subject matter of the consideration in the decision reported in 34 VST 342 (Tvl.Bharat Offset and others Vs. The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal) cannot in any manner dilute the law declared by this Court applicable to the pre amendment period too. 12. Going by the discussion in the judgment reported in 34 VST 342 (Tvl.Bharat Offset and others Vs. The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal), which considered the various decisions of the Supreme Court as well as this Court and other High Courts, we do not have any hesitation in following the said decision and in rejecting the assessee's tax case revision. Accordingly, the Tax Case Revision stands dismissed. No costs. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - CST, VAT & Sales .....

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