NATHMAL TOLARAM Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES DHUBRI
LAWS(SC)-1960-10-15
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: GAUHATI)
Decided on October 18,1960

NATHMAL TOLARAM Appellant
VERSUS
SUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES, DHUBRI Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

SRIDHAR DECD VS. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX [LAWS(ALL)-1985-3-56] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Shah, J. - (1.)The appellants are dealers registered under the Assam Sales Tax Act XVII of 1947 - hereinafter referred to as the Act. For the account period April 1, 1948, to September 30, 1948, the appellants submitted a return of their turnover which included sales in Assam of all goods other than jute. The Superintendent of Taxes, Dhubri, summarily assessed the appellants under sub-sec. (4) of S. 17 of the Act to pay tax on sales of jute despatched by them to Calcutta during the account period. Appeals against the order of assessment to the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes and to the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam, proved unsuccessful. The appellants then applied to the Commissioner of Taxes to refer certain questions arising out of the assessment to the High Court in Assam under S. 34 of the Act. The Commissioner referred the following questions and another to the High Court of Judicature in Assam:
1. Whether, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the turnover from 20,515 maunds of jute mentioned under item (i) is taxable under the Act

2. Whether, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the turnover from 5,500 maunds of jute mentioned under item (ii) is taxable under the Act

3. Whether, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the turnover from 25,209 maunds of jute mentioned under item (iii) is taxable under the Act

(2.)In respect of each of the three questions 1 to 3, the High Court recorded the following answer:
"Not being a sale within the meaning of sub-sec. (12) of S. 2 of the Act, the consignments are not taxable."

(3.)The High Court, however, observed:
"As to whether these consignments can hereafter be assessed if they fall within the purview of the Explanation to sub-sec. (12) of S. 2, we express no opinion."

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.