AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1962 (4) TMI 87
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs from their customers for the supply of publicity posters. The petitioners were to supply the paper for the posters. They were also to prepare the designs for the printing according to the instructions of their customers and had to get the printing work done on the posters, which they got executed by other printing presses after paying the charges for the work done. The petitioners issued to the customers separate bills in respect of each of their orders for posters: one for the sale of the paper required for the posters and the other for charges for work, labour and skill. In the relevant assessment period in the present case, the petitioners had collected from their customers, apart from the price of the paper supplied, a total amount o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e customers of the petitioners. This showed, according to the Additional Collector, that the property in the papers had not passed to the customers before the printing was done on the paper. He pointed out that no stock book was maintained by the petitioners and although it was stated on behalf of the petitioners that paper was supplied to the printers under delivery chalans no such chalans had been produced by them. In the view of the Additional Collector, therefore, it was not conclusively proved by the petitioners that they had first supplied the paper to the customers and that thereafter they had undertaken to get the designs printed thereon and they, therefore, were not entitled to have the amount of Rs. 34,126-15-0 excluded from the t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her for the work, labour and skill. The confirmatory letters which he had produced before the Sales Tax Authorities and the Tribunal and the bills which he had supplied to the customers as also the accounts which he had maintained in connection with the transactions clearly substantiated his case. The Sales Tax Authorities and the Tribunal have ignored this evidence, which is clearly in favour of the petitioners without assigning any good or proper reasons. The Tribunal, he points out, is in error when it says that the petitioners had not produced any material to show that there were initially separate contracts for the supply of paper and for the printing thereof when there was, as a matter of fact, prima facie evidence produced by them. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a result of the appreciation of the evidence on record, it would undoubtedly be a finding of fact not capable of being disturbed. If, however, in arriving at the said conclusion, there was an error of law involved, it would not be a binding finding of facts. In out opinion, the finding arrived at by the Tribunal is the result of its having misconceived the correct position in law. It has not held as contended by the learned Advocate-General that the contract in the present case is one and indivisible for the supply of ready-made posters. What it has held is that the petitioners have failed to prove that there were initially two separate contracts one for the supply of papers and the other for work and labour. It appears to us that the view....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e ignored the evidence produced by the petitioners in the form of bills supplied by them to the customers and the confirmatory letters. That is why we do not find in the judgment of the Tribunal any discussion of the said evidence or its conclusion as to the legal effect thereof. The learned Advocate-General has pointed out that although the decision of the Tribunal does not contain a discussion of this evidence and does not state the reasons for its rejection the decision of the Additional Collector would indicate that he has dealt with the said evidence and has also given reasons for its rejection. And since the Tribunal was not disagreeing with the view taken by the Additional Collector with regard to the said evidence, the Tribunal m....