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 devaswom, which sold timber obtained from spontaneously grown trees after felling and dressing them, was a dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.
Analysis: The definition of "dealer" requires carrying on the business of buying, selling, supplying or distributing goods, and the inclusion of a person selling goods produced by him still presupposes business activity, unless the statute expressly excludes that requirement. The definitions of "business", "casual trader", and "sale" emphasise the business character of the transaction. Mere felling of spontaneous trees and dressing them for convenient carriage did not amount to manufacture, because no new commercial commodity emerged with a distinct identity. The trees were not shown to have been produced by the assessee by manufacture, agriculture, horticulture or otherwise, and there was no evidence that the sales were carried on as a business or trade. The burden lay on the department to establish both production and business activity, and that burden was not discharged.
Conclusion: The devaswom was not a dealer under the Act, and the sales turnover of the timber was not liable to sales tax on the facts found.
Ratio Decidendi: A person selling spontaneously grown timber does not become a dealer unless the goods sold were produced by him and the sales were effected in the course of trade or business; mere felling and dressing of trees for transport does not amount to manufacture or create dealer status.