Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the market committee had jurisdiction to direct commission agents to collect sales tax on jaggery sales from purchasers instead of from the agriculturist-sellers, and whether such direction was inconsistent with the sales tax law governing the transaction.
Analysis: The statutory scheme of the markets legislation authorises regulation of the market, licensing of dealers, supervision of market functionaries, and levy of market fees, but it does not confer power on the market committee to control the incidence, levy, or collection of sales tax on transactions of sale within the notified area. Under the sales tax law, jaggery is taxable at the first point of sale and the dealer acting for the principal is liable to pay the tax to the State, while retaining the right to reimbursement from the principal. A market committee resolution cannot alter that statutory position or take away the reimbursement right created by the sales tax statute. The power to regulate marketing transactions does not extend to dictating from whom sales tax shall be collected.
Conclusion: The impugned resolution was without jurisdiction, contrary to the sales tax statute, and unenforceable.
Ratio Decidendi: A market committee cannot, in the absence of express statutory authority, regulate the incidence or collection of sales tax in a manner that conflicts with the governing sales tax law or defeats the dealer's statutory reimbursement right.