Purchase price includes compulsory pre-delivery charges, limiting revision only where the assessment is erroneous and revenue-prejudicial.

Contractual charges for storage, special services, distribution and freight formed part of the purchase price because the agreement made them compulsory and they were payable for pre-delivery services and facilities. On that basis, the difference between purchase price and resale price remained below the statutory forty per cent threshold, so the deeming rule treating the resale as the first point of sale was not attracted. The revisional authority under section 36(1) could not substitute an incorrect view of purchase price, since suo motu revision is available only where the assessment order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the charges paid under the agreement for storage, special services, distribution and freight formed part of the purchase price, and whether the revisional order under section 36(1) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 was sustainable.

Analysis: The agreement expressly made the charges compulsory and treated them as part of the price of the goods, and they were payable for services and facilities provided before delivery of the liquor. Under section 2(30) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 and rule 4 of the Assam General Sales Tax Rules, 1993, the purchase price includes sums paid or payable as valuable consideration for the purchase of goods, including amounts charged for anything done by the seller at or before delivery. When these charges were included, the difference between purchase price and resale price remained below the forty per cent threshold under section 8(1)(a) and rule 12, so the deeming provision treating the resale as first point of sale was not attracted. The revisional authority ignored the agreement and substituted an incorrect view on purchase price, even though suo motu revision under section 36(1) can be exercised only where the assessment order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.

Conclusion: The charges formed part of the purchase price, the assessments were not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, and the revisional order was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: In sales tax matters, contractual charges payable for pre-delivery services and facilities form part of the purchase price, and suo motu revision cannot be invoked unless the original order is demonstrably erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.

---