TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1973 (11) TMI 71
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....), 1501 of 1972 (Messrs. Shri Laxmi Cotton Traders (Private) Limited v. State of Punjab and Another), 1502 of 1972 (Messrs. N. Fatehally & Company v. State of Punjab and Another), 1503 of 1972 (Messrs. International Cotton Corporation (Private) Limited v. State of Punjab and Another), 1504 of 1972 (Messrs. Kotak Company v. State of Punjab and Another), 842 of 1972 (Messrs. International Cotton Corporation (Private) Limited v. State of Punjab and Another), 843 of 1972 (Messrs. Khimji Virran and Sons v. State of Punjab and Another), 3590 of 1972 (Messrs. Dhanraj Mal-Gobind Ram v. State of Punjab and Another), 858 of 1972 (Messrs. Mohan Lal-Moti Lal v. State of Punjab and Another), 3450 of 1972 (Messrs. Mohan Lal-Moti Lal v. State of Punjab an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act and is liable to tax in the hands of the last purchaser. Section 5 of the Act, which is the charging section, prescribes the rate of tax to be levied, the taxable turnover, the manner of its determination and the stage at which the declared goods are to be assessed to sales tax or purchase tax, as the case may be. The "taxable turnover", according to section 5(2), means: ".......that part of a dealer's gross turnover during any period which remains after deduction therefrom...... (vi) the purchase of goods which are sold not later than six months after the close of the year, to a registered dealer, or in the course of interState trade or commerce or in the course of export out of the territory of India: Provided that in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Others v. Shakti Cotton Company[1972] 29 S.T.C. 706 (S.C.). I have gone through that judgment very carefully and find that in that judgment their Lordships never decided that the deduction under section 5(2)(a)(vi) of the Act was not to be allowed in the case of cotton while assessing it to purchase tax. In that case, the respondent-firm purchased unginned cotton and, after ginning, sold ginned cotton and cotton seeds to registered dealers or in the course of inter-State trade. Cotton was liable to purchase tax under the Act and the firm claimed that In computing its gross turnover for the year 1961-62, the entire purchase price of the unginned cotton had to be deducted under sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the position regarding collection of sales tax in respect of declared goods, after the Punjab Act was amended in 1967, and (ii) that neither the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Bhawani Cotton Mills Limited v. State of Punjab and Another[1967] 20 S.T.C. 290 (S.C.). nor the effect of the amendments made by the Punjab General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967, regarding the levy and collection of sales tax in respect of declared goods, had been considered. The Supreme Court held: "(i) that, in view of the amendments made by the Act of 1967 in the Act of 1948, an entirely new scheme had been evolved in the matter of assessment to sales tax of declared goods, and a fresh assessment had to be made under section 11AA s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an be sought by the respondents from that judgment. After a careful reading of section 5 of the Act, I am of the opinion that the Assessing Authority has to determine the dealer who is liable to pay the purchase tax according to the provisions of section 5(3) of the Act, while the taxable turnover on which purchase tax is leviable has to be determined in accordance with the provisions of section 5(2), that is, the taxable turnover has to be determined after allowing the deductions mentioned in sub-clauses (i) to (vii) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Act out of the gross turnover. While determining the taxable turnover, the deduction of the purchase value of the goods sold to a registered dealer or in the course of in....