TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (7) TMI 357
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Tribunal was justified in holding that the expression "consumable stores" (or "mill stores") as mentioned in the registration certificates of the purchasing dealers, namely, the Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and the Indian Standard Wagon Co. Ltd. covers "leather boots". 2.. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that "leather boots" sold by the assessee, Glacekid (India) Pvt. Ltd. to the purchasing dealers, namely, the Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and the Indian Standard Wagon Co. Ltd. were intended for use by them in the manufacture of goods in West Bengal for sale in terms of the provisions of section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. 2.. The facts rele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osition of penalty did not appear to him to be excessive. The assessee thereupon moved the Board of Revenue for further revision which was eventually transferred to the West Bengal Commercial Taxes Tribunal and was heard and disposed of by a Member of the Tribunal by an order dated May 28, 1975. Before the Board of Revenue or for the matter of that the Tribunal, the propriety of the imposition of penalty was not challenged. The only point canvassed was that the rejection of the claim on account of sales to registered dealers under section 5(2)(a)(ii) amounting to Rs. 96,547.11 was improper and unjustified. In the registration certificates of the purchasing dealers the expression "consumable stores" or "mill stores" was entered. It was urged....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibunal that leather boots were included within the expression "mill stores " or "consumable stores" appearing in the registration certificates of the purchasing dealers, was an inference based upon interpretation of their respective registration certificates and was, therefore, a question of law. 4.. It was urged on behalf of the assessee that in view of the decision in the case of Phelps & Co. (Private) Ltd. v. Member, Board of Revenue, West Bengal [1967] 20 STC 511 of the Calcutta High Court, confirmed by the Supreme Court in Member, Board of Revenue, West Bengal v. Phelps and Co. (P.) Ltd. [1972] 29 STC 101, no question of law really arose out of the revisional order passed by the Tribunal. 5.. On a consideration of the facts and c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n behalf of the assessee, contended that there is no point of law involved which could be referred for opinion, and that the question that arose was really concluded by a decision of the Calcutta High Court which was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court. The decision relied on by Mr. Mukherjee is a Division Bench decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Phelps & Co. (Private) Ltd. v. Member, Board of Revenue reported in [1967] 20 STC 511. In that case the assessee claimed exemption under section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, in respect of "hand gloves" supplied by the assessee to the purchasing dealers. It was observed that goods which are consumed in the manufacture of finished products, as also g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ealers as protective apparels in the same way as industrial gloves were used by workmen engaged in hot jobs. According to the decision of the Supreme Court the expression "mill stores" included within its ambit industrial gloves in appropriate cases. On the same analogy consumable stores as certified in the registration certificates in the case may be said to include leather boots used by workmen in iron and steel factories engaged in the manufacturing operation. 9.. The learned State Representative, however, contended that there was no evidence before the Tribunal to justify a conclusion that leather boots were necessary for manufacture in West Bengal so as to entitle the assessee to claim exemption under section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Act.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., there is no dispute that the purchasing dealers are genuine registered dealers. There is no dispute that they had issued declaration forms indicating that the items sold were necessary for the purpose of manufacture of goods in West Bengal for sale. The department did not controvert this position but merely challenged before the authorities below that in the registration certificate of the purchasing dealers the item leather boots was not specifically mentioned. On the analogy of the decision rendered in the case of Phelps & Co. [1972] 29 STC 101 (SC), that seems to be immaterial. The material question urged for our consideration is whether the goods sold were necessary for the purpose of manufacture in West Bengal for sale. So far as tha....