A S KRISHNA AND CO GUNTUR Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA
LAWS(APH)-1955-8-2
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on August 09,1955

A.S.KRISHNA AND CO. Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

CLAY V. TALES [REFERRED TO]
LEE V. GRIFFIN [REFERRED TO]
NIMAR COTTON PRESS,HHANDWA V. SALES TAX OFFICER,KHANDWA [REFERRED TO]
DOMINION PRESS LTD. V. MINISTER OF CUSTOMS [REFERRED TO]
ROBINSON V. GRAVES [REFERRED TO]
MOHANLAL JOGANI RICE AND ALTA MILLS V. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]
BANARSI DAS V. STATE OF M. P. [REFERRED TO]
NAVINCHANDRA MAFATLAL BOMBAY VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BOMBAY CITY [REFERRED TO]
VARASUKI AND COMPANY VS. PROVINCE OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN LEAF TOBACCO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF MADRAS NOW ANDHRA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

TASVEER KENDRA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1975-8-7] [REFERRED TO]
GUNTUR TOBACCOS LTD VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA NOW ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-1961-4-10] [REFERRED TO]
JAIKISHAN GOPIKISHAN VS. COMMISSIONER SALES-TAX [LAWS(MPH)-1956-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDRAM RAMPRASAD VS. ASSESSING AUTHORITY SALES TAX [LAWS(MPH)-1957-2-6] [REFERRED TO]
NIMAR COTTON PRESS VS. SALES TAX OFFICER [LAWS(MPH)-1960-9-10] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADRAS VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-1956-3-1] [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. GUNTUR TOBACCOS LTD [LAWS(SC)-1964-11-15] [REFERRED]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. ASSOCIATED HOTELS OF INDIA LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-1972-1-36] [DISTINGUISHED]
NIZAM SUGAR FACTORY LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-1956-2-27] [REFERRED]
DASARATHI MOHAPATRA VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-1957-7-7] [REFERRED TO]
JAIN TRANSPORT CO VS. SAKINABAI [LAWS(MPH)-1989-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1957-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
INSTRUMENTATION LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [LAWS(CE)-2011-3-103] [REFERRED TO]
ALSTOM PROJECTS INDIA LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, DELHI [LAWS(CE)-2011-3-138] [REFERRED TO]
A SRINIVASA PAI VS. SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALTRIVANDRUM [LAWS(KER)-1960-11-24] [REFERRED TO]
PUNYAMURTULA SATYANARAYANA KRISHNAMARJU VS. SATYAVOLU APPARAO AND ANOTHER [LAWS(APH)-1958-9-31] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Subba Rao, CJ. - (1.)This batch of revisions is filed against the order of the Sales- tax Appellate Tribunal 'holding that the material used to pack the redried tobacco was the subject of sale and was, therefore, liable to sales-tax.
(2.)The petitioners A. S. Krishna & Co., have a plant for redrying raw tobacco. Owners of tobacco give them tobacco for re-drying. The petitioners purchase the material necessary for parking, redry the tobacco and pack it before delivering it to the customer. They collect from each customer a consolidated charge for redrying as well as packing. Aggregate charges are levied at the rate of one anna per Ib. besides a charge of Re. 1, per bale. For the years 1950-51- 1951-52, 1952-53 and 1953-54, they were assessed to sale-tax on the sale turnover of the packing material. The Sales-tax Appellate Tribunal held that, though tobacco was exempt from sales-tax, the packing material was not exempt and that, as the packing materials were transferred to the constituents for consideration, the transactions amounted to sales and therefore they were liable to sales-tax. Mr. Sayee, learned counsel for the appellants, contended that packing is an integral part of the drying process and, therefore, the contract between the parties- is one of work and labour and that no sale is involved in the transaction. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, argued that the process of packing is not a part of the drying process but is entirely extraneous to it. As the material is purchased by the assessees and the property therein is transferred to the customers for price, the transaction, in so far as the packing material is concerned, is clearly one of sale.
(3.)Before adverting to the contentions of the parties, it may be convenient to notice briefly the manner in which law tobacco undergoes the drying process. Why and how are the packing materials used ? Are they used only .to pack the dried tobacco to keep it intact and to prevent pollution and exposure, or, do they form an integral part of the drying process itself ? Garner in his book on the Production of Tobacco says at page 422 :
"When the storage room is artificially heated the fermentation begins at once and the process is termed forced sweating............Perhaps the chief weakness of the case sweating procedure is the increased danger of decay from black not because of lack of control of the moisture content of the stems at the time of packing. Turkish cigarette tobaccos are fermented chiefly in bales and there is a moderate rise in temperature in the course of the process."
The Aging Process.
"Although the general objective is much the same the very slow natural aging which flue-cured tobacco normally undergoes after packing perhaps stands in strongest contrast with the rapid and vigorous fermentation characterising cigar tobaccos and certain other types when they contain high percentages of moisture. Prior to packing, the moisture content of flue-cured tobacco is standardised at a low level (10 to 12 per cent) and this is necessary, for flue-cured leaf will not ferment normally with a high moisture content but instead it will quickly blacken and spoil. As the tobacco emerges from the redrying machine the hands are promptly packed in hogsheads under hydraulic pressure while the tobacco is still warm."

;


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