CTO Vs. KUNDAN MAL MUKAND MAL
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
KUNDAN MAL MUKAND MAL
Click here to view full judgement.
S. C. AGARWAL, J. -
(1.)- Both these applications have been filed u/s 15 (2) of the Rajasthan ST Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ). By these applications, the CTO Special Circle, Kota, petitioner herein has prayed that the Board of Revenue may be directed to refer to this court the questions referred to in para 11 of the applications. Sales Tax Case No. 106 of 1980 relates to the asst. yr. 1964-65 (15-11-1963 to 4-11-1964) and the Sales Tax Case No. 107 of 1980 relates to the asst. yr. 1966-67 (24-10-1965 to 12-11-1966 ).
(2.)M/s Kundanmal Mukandmal non-petitioner No. 1 in both these petitions (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee' is a registered dealer under the Act and the turnover of the assessee for the relevant assessment years included the sales of imported bardana bags. The CTO imposed sales tax on the sale of imported bardana. The Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the tax levied by the CTO on the sales of bardana and remanded the case for passing the assessment order afresh, after providing to the assessee an opportunity of being heard on the question of sales of bardana. The petitioner submitted a revision petition against the aforesaid order of the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals ). The single member of the Board of Revenue set aside the order of the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) and held that the bardana is imported with cloth without any price being charged for the same and same was not taxable. A special appeal was filed by the petitioner against the said order of the learned Single Member of the Board of Revenue. The Division Bench of the Board of Revenue relying upon the proviso to s. 5 of the Act, held that the tax leviable on the sale of bardana would be at the same rate as the tax leviable on the goods packed in it and remanded the case to the assessing authority with the direction that he may re-examine the issue in view of the observations made in the judgement. The Board of Revenue also observed that no tax would be leviable on the implied sale of bardana which had been used for packing tax free or tax paid goods. The petitioner moved applications before the Board of Revenue u/s 15 (1) of the Act for making a reference to this court of the questions of law arising out of the decision of the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue. The said applications filed by the petitioner u/s 15 (1) of the Act were dismissed by the Board of Revenue by its order dt. 31-7-1979 on the ground that there was no ambiguity and the provisions of law are very clear and that there was no need for making a reference to this court. Thereupon the petitioner has filed these applications u/s 15 (1) of the Act.
We have heard Sh. G. S. Bapna, the learned counsel for the petitioner. The assessee has failed to appear even though he was duly served.
After perusing the order passed by the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue dt. 16-1-1979 we are of the opinion that the following question of law arises out of the said order of the Board of Revenue: "whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, sales tax was leviable on the imported bardana used for the packing of cloth sold by the assessee?" The applications are disposed of as indicated above with no order as to costs. .
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.