Substance over label in forest produce transactions: royalty treated as sale consideration and held taxable.

The court treated the label "royalty" as irrelevant where the substance of the arrangement showed transfer of proprietary rights in forest produce for consideration. Because the Forest Department required collection of lichen, storage in its godown, and delivery only on payment of the agreed amount, the transaction was not a bare licence or privilege to enter the forest. It was instead a transfer of property in movable goods, so the trade tax authorities were justified in treating the amount as taxable sale consideration under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amount described as royalty was in substance consideration for the transfer of proprietary right in the forest produce and, if so, whether the transaction was liable to trade tax under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

Analysis: The Forest Department did not merely confer a licence or privilege to collect the lichen for the revisionist's own benefit. The factual arrangement showed that the revisionist was required to collect the lichen, keep it in the Forest Department's godown, and then receive it upon payment of the agreed consideration. The use of the expression "royalty" did not control the true legal character of the transaction. In substance, the amount was consideration for transfer of the proprietary right in movable property, and not payment for a bare privilege to enter the forest. On that footing, the trade tax authorities were justified in treating the transaction as taxable.

Conclusion: The revisionist's challenge failed on merits and the transaction was held taxable; the amount termed royalty was treated as sale consideration, not as payment for a mere privilege.

Final Conclusion: The revisions succeeded procedurally, but the substantive tax liability was upheld in favour of the Revenue, with the earlier orders set aside and taxability affirmed on the true character of the transaction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the real nature of the arrangement shows transfer of property in goods for consideration, a label such as royalty will not prevent the amount from being taxed as sale consideration.

---