Commission agent tax liability bars principal refund claim where the agents' assessments have already become final.

A commission agent treated as a dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act bears primary tax liability for transactions undertaken on behalf of a principal, and refund under section 33 is confined to excess tax paid in the assessee's own assessment. The Tribunal's rule 50 clarification was limited to the firm's disputed turnovers and did not reopen the final assessments of the commission agents. Because the agents were separately assessed, paid the tax, and allowed those assessments to attain finality, the principal could not seek a refund in its own proceedings of tax paid by the agents.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Tribunal's clarification under rule 50 was confined to correcting the firm's own assessments and did not reopen the final assessments made on commission agents. (ii) Whether a principal can claim refund, in its own assessment proceedings, of tax paid by its commission agents on sales effected by them when the agents' assessments have become final.

Issue (i): Whether the Tribunal's clarification under rule 50 was confined to correcting the firm's own assessments and did not reopen the final assessments made on commission agents.

Analysis: The clarification order was read as explaining that the appeals concerned only the disputed turnovers of the firm and not the separately assessed transactions of the commission agents. The Tribunal did not undertake a fresh adjudication on the merits of the agents' assessments. Rule 50 was therefore treated as having been used for clarification, not for substantive alteration of final assessments.

Conclusion: The clarification was valid and did not affect the final assessments of the commission agents.

Issue (ii): Whether a principal can claim refund, in its own assessment proceedings, of tax paid by its commission agents on sales effected by them when the agents' assessments have become final.

Analysis: Under section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, a commission agent is itself treated as a dealer and bears the primary responsibility for tax on transactions effected by it on behalf of the principal, though the principal may also be liable in the statutory scheme. Refund under section 33 is tied to excess tax paid in the assessee's own assessment. Since the commission agents were separately assessed, paid the tax, and did not challenge those assessments, the principal could not, in its own proceedings, seek refund of tax paid by the agents. The fact that the agents' assessments had become final reinforced that the refund claim could not be shifted to the principal.

Conclusion: The principal was not entitled to claim refund of tax paid by the commission agents.

Final Conclusion: The revision cases failed because the disputed tax paid by the commission agents could not be recovered through the principal's assessments, and the Tribunal's clarification was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute makes a commission agent a dealer with primary liability to tax, refund can be claimed only in the assessment of the assessee who actually paid the tax and challenged the assessment; a principal cannot claim refund of tax finally assessed and paid by separately assessed commission agents.

---