Packing material sold with cement not taxable under sales tax law

The court held that packing material sold with cement is not subject to sales tax. Relying on precedents like Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. and ACTO v. M.B. & Co., the court found no separate sale of bags from the cement, leading to the conclusion that no tax is leviable on the packing material. The Revenue's challenge was dismissed by the Rajasthan High Court, and the Supreme Court upheld this decision, affirming that packing material is not taxable. The court emphasized that the issue had been conclusively settled by previous judgments, resulting in the dismissal of the revision petition.

---

---

Issues:
Whether packing material sold along with cement is subject to sales tax or notRs.

Analysis:
The case revolves around the taxation of packing material sold along with cement. The assessing officer had separated the sale of bags from the cement and levied tax on the packing material, leading to a challenge by the assessee. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tax Board both found that the Department failed to prove the separate sale of bags, resulting in no tax being leviable on the packing material. The Revenue challenged these decisions, citing precedents such as Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. and ACTO v. M.B. & Co., where similar issues were addressed.

In the Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. case, the court considered the composite sale of beer and liquor in bottles, concluding that there is no presumption of the separate sale of bottles. Similarly, in the ACTO case, the assessing officer had levied tax on packing material as an implied sale, but the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tax Board set aside this decision. The Rajasthan High Court dismissed the Revenue's revision petition, and the Supreme Court upheld this decision, ruling that packing material is not subject to tax.

Therefore, the court in the present case found that the legal question had already been settled by previous judgments, both at the state and apex court levels. As the issue was fully covered by the decisions in Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. and ACTO v. M.B. & Co., the court concluded that there was no merit in the revision petition and dismissed it accordingly.

---