TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (4) TMI 265
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellate Assistant Commissioner concerned but without success. Thereafter the matter was taken on appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal the assessee's main contention was that it is not a dealer and that the sales which were subjected to tax were not incidental or ancillary to the transport operations carried on by the assessee. It was also contended that their transactions were similar to those of the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation which has been held by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh as not a dealer in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Commercial Tax Officer [1971] 27 STC 42. The Tribunal, after considering the assessee's contention and after referring to the said decision of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 11. G.I. sheets 2,975.99 12. Paint tins 540.00 13. Tyres, tubes, flaps (old) 1,88,009.51 14. Waste papers 4,933.35 15. G.I. break drums (condemned) 3,583.39 16. Unclaimed articles 22.25 17. Second sales of radios and transistors 4,146.00 18. Canteen sales 83,795.01 19. Sales of old unserviceable buses 92,799.00 20. Machineries transferred to Cheran Engineering Corporation Private Ltd. 7,31,915.04 ------------Total turnover 11,94,003.04 DEDUCTIONS ALLOWED: Second sales of radios and transistors 4,146.00 Canteen sales 83,395.61 ------------- 87,941.61 ------------- Taxable turnover 11,06,061.00 ------------- This said turnover relating to the sales of scrap items was brought to charge ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the sale of unserviceable materials as part of the business of the assessee, the Northern Railway, Jodhpur. The Court also held that the definition of "dealer" also takes in a Central or State Government or any of their departments, and therefore, the Nothern Railway, jodhpur, which is run by the Central Government should be taken to be a dealer and the sale of unserviceable articles by it should be taken to fall within the expression "business " as amended by Act 9 of 1965 amending section 2 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. In State of Tamil Nadu v. Binny Ltd. [1982] 49 STC 17 (SC) the Supreme Court reiterated the principle laid down in Burmah Shell's case [1973] 31 STC 426 (SC). In that case the activity of selling provisions to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilar view has been taken by this Court. In that case the Port Trust which sold unclaimed and unserviceable articles through auctioneers and the turnover relating to such sales was held to be not taxable on the ground that the Port Trust had not effected the sales in the course of a business activity or with a profit-motive, and therefore, it was not taxable. The Court observed that the Port Trust is a statutory body constituted by the Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 and though it is subject to certain control by the Central Government under the provisions of that Act, it cannot be said to be a department of the Central Government and therefore, the Port Trust cannot be treated as a dealer, unless it carries on the business of buying and selling....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ravelling public and though one of the objects related to disposal of its own discarded parts, that certainly was only an annual event and the assessee did not devote its time and attention for the purpose of having the transactions of disposal of spares and scrap and therefore, the transaction relating to disposal of scrap (and) new parts which were no more necessary for the business of the assessee did not constitute business and the assessee could not be treated as a dealer in respect of such transactions. The question is whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee is not a dealer and therefore its ancillary transaction of sale of scrap and unnecessary materials could be held to be not taxable. As already pointed out in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case. Therefore, following the decision of the Supreme Court in District Controller of Stores v. Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer [1976] 37 STC 423 (SC) we hold that the assessee is a dealer under section 2(g) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and therefore its transactions of sales of unserviceable or excessive material are liable to be taxed, as per the decision of the Supreme Court in Burmah Shell's case [1973] 31 STC 426 (SC). The learned counsel for the assessee then contends that even assuming that the sales of unserviceable and scrap materials are liable to be taxed as held by us, still the assessing authority was not justified in assessing the sum of Rs. 7,31,915.15 representing the value of the machineri....