THANIKKACHALAM, J. - (1.) THESE tax case revisions relate to the three assessment years, viz., 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. There are four assesses in these five tax case revisions. The question arising in all these tax revision cases is common. Hence, they are taken up together for the sake of convenience. The common question that arises for consideration in all these tax revision cases is whether the goods have already suffered tax in the hands of the sellers.
(2.) EXEMPTION was claimed by the assessees on the purchase turnovers involved in the revisions and the exemption sought for was granted on the ground that the purchases were second purchases in the hands of the assessees. Groundnut kernel is taxable at the point of the first purchase as single point goods. The assessing officer on verification has found that the exemption granted on the said purchase turnover on the said ground is not correct. According to the assessing officer, the Alangudi dealers are mere decorticators and they are not the dealers as defined under the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (in short, "the Act"). In fact they are not the owners of the groundnut kernel purchased by the assessees and only the agriculturists were the owners of the groundnut kernel and therefore the purchases effected by the assessees are the first purchases liable to tax and the goods have not already suffered tax. Even assuming that the dealers at Alangudi have collected tax from the assessees, it makes no difference, as it is a matter between the dealers and the assessees and the purchases are liable to tax as the first purchase, according to the assessing officer. On appeal filed by the assessees, the Appellant Assistant Commissioner confirmed the order passed by the assessing officer on this aspect. Aggrieved the assessees filed appeals before the Appellate Tribunal. The main contention raised for and on behalf of the assessees was that the dealers at Alangudi from whom the assessees had purchased groundnut kernel are the registered dealers and commission agents. They have collected sales tax on the transactions from the assessees. They have declared in the bills to the effect that single point tax on the transaction has been paid. Some of the assessees in their objections before the assessing officer pleaded for reasonable opportunity to prove their claims and contentions. But no opportunity was given by the authorities below in this regard. According to the department though Alangudi dealers are registered dealers they are only brokers and the purchases effected from them are only first purchases liable to tax. Considering all the submissions made by the assessees as well as the departmental representative, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the matter requires verification. For the purpose of verifying whether the sellers paid tax on the sale of groundnut kernel, all the appeals were remanded back to the file of the assessing officer with a direction to ascertain this aspect and dispose of all these matters on merits and in accordance with law. It is as against this order, the department is in revision before this Court in the case of all the assessee.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that the dealers from whom the appellants/assessees have effected purchases of groundnut kernel are commission agents at Alangudi. They appear to have collected tax on the purchases effected by the assessees under the bills and remitted the same to the Government. Some of the bills contained a clause in Tamil stating that 'single point tax was collected". Normally, this would be taken as a declaration as contemplated under section 26(13). Form No. 21 states "Certified that the goods covered by this bill have suffered tax at our hands already" * . As already seen the clause in the relevant bills under which the purchases have been effected states that the purchasers entrusted certain amount for the purpose of paying single point tax on the goods. This clause does not indicate that the goods have already suffered tax at the hands of the dealers. IT is not clear whether the purchases effected by the assessee are the first purchases and the tax has been paid by them on the purchases or whether the dealers at Alangudi have already paid tax on the first purchase and the purchases in the hands of the assessee are only the second purchases. If the purchases effected by the assessees are second purchases, then there was no necessity for them to pay single point tax on the second purchases. The fact the the assessees entrusted certain amount with the dealers for payment of single point tax on the goods purchased throws considerable doubt whether the purchase are the second purchase. What is required to be proved is whether the dealers who are stated to be registered dealers have paid the single point tax at the point of first purchase on the goods already. Since the material placed before the Tribunal did not provide an answer to this question, the Tribunal considered that this matter should go back to the file of the assessing authority for verification. In that view of the matter, the appeals were remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for verification whether Alangudi dealers have paid the tax already on their purchase.;