TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1962 (4) TMI 76
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. The facts are in a narrow compass and are not also in dispute. Vauhini Pictures Private Ltd., Vijayawada, is engaged in the business of distribution of the cinematograph films. In the course of their business, that company supplied publicity material for the use of the exhibitors. Some of the publicity materials so sold to the exhibitors in the year 1957-58 were actually returned in 1958-59 and the sale price of the same had been refunded by the assessee namely, Vauhini Pictures Ltd., Vijayawada, to the purchasers. This claim which has been so put forward by the assessee was rejected by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Vijayawada, and the same was approved by the Deputy Commissioner, Kurnool, when it came before him. The Sales Tax A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evious years. Therefore, the question which falls to be considered is whether, as contended for by the learned Government Pleader, the language of rule 6 could be taken to be so restrictive as to exclude the return of articles sold in previous years. For a correct understanding of what is meant by that rule, it is necessary to set it out and examine it. The relevant parts of that rule read: "6. (1) The tax or taxes under sections 5, 6 or notified under section 9(1) shall be levied on the net turnover of a dealer. In determining the net turnover, the amounts specified in clauses (a) to (1) shall subject to the conditions specified therein, be deducted from the total turnover of a dealer- (a) * * * (b) (i) all amounts allowed to p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the language of rule 6, it becomes all the more necessary that the principle, there could be no tax in regard to a sale which has not been actively and effectively put through though at first intended to be a sale, should be kept in mind. Mere hardships which crop up in applying this rule cannot stand in the way of correct construction of this rule. Further, we are firmly of the view that anything which the language of the rule itself cannot convey. should not be imported into it, merely on the ground that either a lacuna exists or a hardship is caused in giving effect to the rule as it stands. Bearing this in mind, it is, therefore, necessary to scan the relevant portions of rule 6, which have been extracted above. Sub-rule (1) lays down i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or rule. Any equitable or other considerations calculated to help the taxing authorities are indeed tabooed in the matter of construction of taxing laws.As has been pointed out by Rowlatt, J., in Cape Brandy Syndicate v. Inland Revenue Commissioners[1921] 1 K.B. 64 at 71.: "In a taxing Act one has to look merely at what is clearly said. There is no room for any intendment. There is no equity about a tax. There is no presumption as to a tax. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairly at the language used." The same caution has been administered by Lord Cairns in Partington v. Attorney-General(1869) L.R. 4 H.L. 100, 122. ".............. if there be admissible, in any statute, what is called an e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....taking into account of the return of the goods only in the assessment year and not in regard to goods sold out previously but were returned in the assessment year. No doubt, the learned Government Pleader contends that the computation of the turnover for assessment after making deductions in respect of the refund for sales in the previous year could not have been thought of at all by the taxing statute. But we are unable to accede to this way of reading the rule, because there is the simple fact that if that was meant to be the way in which that rule should operate, nothing, in our view, prevented the rule-making authority to have been specific about it, and to expressly impose limitations in definite words instead of asking us to so constr....