9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise and Taxation Officer had asked the appellant-Corporation to deposit an amount of Rs. 29,52,874.15 before 30-3-2001, the Corporation had deposited the said amount on 28-3-2001. As by this order, we propose to request the High Court to decide the first question afresh, there is no need to elaborate upon the same except holding that adequate materials as well as factual details are available for determination of the first question of law referred to the High Court. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the said order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal. The Sales Tax Tribunal vide its order dated 22-11-1984 dismissed the same. The appellant filed a further petition before the Tribunal under Section 22(1) of the Act for referring the questions involved to the High Court for its opinion. On 4-11-1986, the Tribunal rejected the petition of the appellant on the ground that the matter was already under consideration of the High Court and the decision taken on this point would become applicable on all such cases. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed a petition under Section 22(2) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ao, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Ajay Pal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 5.Since the second question of law referred to the High Court is covered by the judgment of this Court and not disputed by both sides, we are left with the first question being referred to the High Court. As said earlier, the High Court by the impugned order, after finding that the first question does not emerge from the order of the Tribunal there being no factual basis returned the same unanswered. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant pointed out that the High Court committed an error in returning the first question referred to it by the Tribunal unanswered when the said question was referred by the Tribunal on the speci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the order of the Tribunal and accordingly we direct the Tribunal to state a case and refer the questions for its opinion :- 1.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the expenses incurred by the State Agencies of the Food Corporation of India after acquiring or purchasing the goods before delivery to the petitioner-dealer could form part of gross turn over and be subjected to tax? 2.whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, could the Market fee be included in the purchase turnover in view of 46-STC-477? Sd/- V. Ramaswami. Chief Justice September 27, 1988" ' Sd/- G.R. Majithia Judge. It is clear from the above order that the Division Bench of the High Court, after satisfying itself, with reference to the q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penses so incurred are purely service charges and these do not formed [sic.] a part of consideration and hence the same should not be taxed. I am of the view that these expenses includes market fees, dami and labour charges, which form the part and parcel of the bill and hence are the part of consideration, so the plea of the representatives of the Corporation is not taxable." 9.Subsequently, the appellant filed an appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) Jalandhar, wherein it specifically contended that market fee and dami were not part of the turnover. Insofar as market fee was concerned, reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in Anand Swarup Mahesh Kumar (supra). In regard to dami (commission paid), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
