TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (12) TMI 326
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....finding of the Tribunal that the applicant, a person, who sold regularly every year agricultural produce of considerable value grown by him on his lands was a 'dealer' within the meaning of the expression as defined in section 2(f) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959, is legal and valid?" 2.. The short facts for disposal of this reference are that the assessee is an unregistered dealer and an agriculturist having 150 bighas of agricultural lands. He used to consume the agricultural produce of his land and the surplus thereof he used to sell in market. He has been assessed as an individual under section 16(5) of the Act by the Assistant Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, Bettiah (hereinafter referred to as "the assessing officer") in relati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of surplus agricultural produce from his land and sales tax cannot be assessed over the aforesaid sales of the assessee as he cannot be treated to be a dealer within the meaning of section 2(f) of the Act. According to him, these are casual transactions of sale and the assessee is not carrying on any business of sale and purchase of agricultural produce. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue contended that it was not a case of casual sale; rather the assessee was selling surplus produce of his agricultural land after meeting his personal consumption and each and every year he was making regular sale of his agricultural produce; as such, he became a dealer within the meaning of section 2(f) of the Act and, co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contract) whether for commission, remuneration or otherwise and includes any firm or a Hindu joint family, the Government and any society, club or association which sells or supplies goods to its members." After the aforesaid amendment, when the matter was taken to this Court in relation to the case of another agriculturist (sic) whose case was covered by the aforesaid amendment of 1950 and who also used to sell surplus agricultural produce of his land, it was held by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Basta Colla Colliery Co. Ltd. [1968] 21 STC 454 that the change in the definition of "dealer" did not make any difference in fastening liability upon an assessee. According to their Lordships, in spite of the fact that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee against which appeals were taken to the Supreme Court. At the same time, petitions under article 32 of the Constitution were also filed challenging the amendment of 1950 in the 1947 Act. The Apex Court dismissed the petitions under article 32 of the Constitution. So far as the appeals against the judgment of this Court on reference are concerned, the same were also dismissed and it was laid down that the assessee while selling agricultural produce of his land became a dealer within the meaning of the expression "dealer" as defined in section 2(c) of the 1947 Act after its amendment in 1950. It was held that the amended definition of the expression "dealer" was very wide and the assessee definitely became a dealer within the meaning o....