TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (3) TMI 347
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... years 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83. The value of the disputed turnover is Rs. 7,07,878, Rs. 14,48,903 and Rs. 15,55,878, respectively for the three assessment years. The short facts which are necessary for the disposal of these revisions are as follows: The assessee contended that the transport charges paid to the third-party lorry owners for transporting sugarcane from the fields of sugarcane growers to the assessee's factory premises are eligible for exemption of tax under rule 6(c) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959, and the same should not be treated as purchase turnover for the purpose of assessment under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, relying on the observations made in the judgment of the Madras High Court in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ards transport charges. But there is a stipulation that the sugarcane growers should supply their sugarcane at the factory site of the mills. It is clear that the price fixed per metric tonne supplied is the price fixed for delivery at the factory site. Admittedly sugarcane is taxable at 12 per cent at the stage of first purchase within the State under entry 62 of the First Schedule. It is also not in dispute that the transport charges paid to the third party lorry owners for transporting sugarcane from the field to the factory site of the petitioners were deducted from the purchase price payable to the growers by the petitioner as per the tripartite agreement. The only contention raised by the assessee is that according to the origin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther than the mill or factory premises and receive reduced prices. The provisions in the application for registration and also the agreement thus clearly establish that the sugarcane grower is responsible for the delivery of the sugarcane in the mill premises. It is true that the mills or factories maintain a fleet of lorries at their disposal and send such lorries to the growers for facilitating delivery. But there is nothing to indicate that there was any departure from the terms of the contract relating to delivery. The sending of lorries by the mills or factories was only to help or facilitate the sugarcane growers to engage and load the lorries at appropriate times in order that the quality of the sugarcane may not deteriorate and also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grower is subsequently given credit to separately. From the price of sugarcane so arrived at, lorry charges, share money, recovery of loan (principal and interest, etc.) are deducted and the net amount payable is arrived at. The bill is passed for the gross amount and the net amount. This also indicates that at all times, the mills or the factories recognised only the statutory price as the purchase price of sugarcane and the transport or other charges have been regarded as amounts payable by the sugarcane grower, but initially paid by the mill and later recovered from the price payable to the sugarcane grower. On these materials, the contention on behalf of the petitioners that there has been a variation or modification of the contract ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcane at the mills or factory premises of the assessee as per contract. There is no provision in the contract for payment of any reduced amount other than the one provided under the statutory provision. It is also admitted by the assessee that the purchase price of sugarcane was fixed by a tripartite committee and that the sugarcane growers should supply their sugarcane at the factory site of the mills. The price fixed is for delivery at the factory site. As rightly observed by the Appellate Tribunal, as per agreement, delivery is to be effected at the doors of the factory and no deduction is permissible under law towards the transport charges incurred by the growers. It is to be noted that sugarcane is taxable at the point of last purch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owers towards transport charges for which exemption was not granted. So far as Rs. 55,624.80 which related to payment of transport charges paid by the assessee to the various third party lorry owners for transporting sugarcane from the field to the factory site, the Bench held that the same was not to be included in the taxable turnover; but the charges paid by the assessee to the cane growers to bring the cut sugarcane is liable to be included in the taxable turnover of the assessee even though a separate voucher was given to the cane growers for the transport charges to which they are entitled to. When once it is accepted that as per an agreement entered into, the sugarcane grower had agreed to bring the sugarcane and deliver it at the mi....