1977 (10) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5,99,033.32 1,00,74,833.98 Relief granted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner 1,20,18,842.80 42,38,182.90 The disputed turnover which had to be dealt with by the Appellate Tribunal 11,67,737.79 1,97,912.56 The enhancement sought by the department 1,20,18,842.80 42,38,182.90 Relief granted by the Tribunal by its order dated 21st February, 1974 7,64,218.52 3,40,694.86 The points taken before us in regard to these two tax revision cases, which are common to these cases are: (i) that the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in allowing the assessee to urge for the first time before it that the sales tax said to have been collected by the assessee along with the price, though without bifurcating the two, should be omitted in determin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e themselves pointed out that the conclusion that they reached that in the case of a total amount consisting of the price of the goods and perhaps the tax payable on the same which are collected together as a single sum, it must be taken that the whole amount paid represented the price of the goods sold is subject to the exception that when provision is contained in the statute enabling the assessee to collect sales tax, the question may be different. In other words, the decision proceeds on the basis that tax as such which is imposed on the seller in the case of sales cannot be passed on from the dealer to the purchaser unless statutory provision is made enabling to collect an amount by way of tax. Even so, when there is a provision in the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er of the Tribunal on this point as well. An additional point arises in T.C. No. 481 of 1974. The additional point relates to the sum of Rs. 39,595, which represented the sale of zinc sulphate. Exemption was granted by the Tribunal on this turnover by relying on item 21 of the First Schedule holding that the sale in question was not first sale, the tax being single point tax. The question is whether on the wording of item 21, which deals with chemical fertilisers, the view taken by the Tribunal is correct or not. Item 21 deals with chemical fertilisers and starts with the words "that is to say" and then specifies 15 items of chemicals and then proceeds to add in item 16 "any mixture of one or more of the articles mentioned in items (1) t....