TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (7) TMI 373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e registered dealers within the meaning of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called as "the Punjab Act"). The main controversy raised in these writ petitions is common, namely, whether sugarcane purchased by the petitioners directly from the growers thereof is subject to levy of purchase tax under the Punjab Act. The petitioners are the sugar mills and are engaged in the manufacture of sugar. They purchase sugarcane, an agricultural produce from the growers thereof directly. Gunny bags purchased by the petitioners are used as packing material for sugar and are sold with sugar. Some other stores are also purchased, which are required to carry on the business. Unserviceable stores are sold in due course of time. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner having failed to deposit the amounts as directed by the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner as a condition precedent for hearing the appeal on merits. In Civil Writ Petition Nos. 5363 to 5369 of 1982, 189 of 1983 and 5248 of 1982, the only challenge to the orders of the Assessing Authority, appellate authority and the Tribunal is to the levy of purchase tax under section 4-B of the Punjab Act on the purchase of sugarcane made from the growers or their family members directly except in C.W.P. No. 5248 of 1982 where an additional challenge is also to the levy of tax on bardana (gunny bags). The writ petitions have been opposed by the State of Punjab. Written statements have been filed. C.W.P. No. 661 of 1984 (Morinda Co-operat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....38 STC 259 (P&H) not even remotely concerned with the question that arose for consideration in Malwa Sugar Mills' case [1976] 38 STC 39 (P&H)", observed that the Full Bench cannot examine the correctness of enunciation of law by another co-equal Bench and, therefore, directed that the matter be put up before the honourable Acting Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench. The matter thereafter came up for hearing before the Full Bench of five Judges on September 17, 1990. The matter could not be taken up for disposal as the learned counsel for the parties agreed that an identical question was pending consideration before the Supreme Court since 1979 in Writ Petition (C) No. 382 of 1979 (Jagatjit Sugar Mills v. State of Punjab). In th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reme Court against the writ petitioners in the case of Jagatjit Sugar Mills' [1995] 96 STC 344; (1994) JT 6 SC 534. It has been held therein that the purchaser of sugarcane is liable to pay purchase tax on its purchase by virtue of section 4(1) of the Punjab Act and that the provision in section 4-B of the Punjab Act is not relevant to the petitioners. This was not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The apex Court after noticing the case of the petitioners in Jagatjit Sugar Mills' case [1995] 96 STC 344; (1994) JT 6 SC 534 and the judgments of this Court as referred to by the learned counsel for the parties, observed in para 25 of the judgment as under: "The view taken by us accords with the view taken by the Punj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... various provisions of the Punjab Act are dismissed, leaving it open to the authorities to proceed according to law from that stage after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioners to show cause in view of the changed position. However, in cases where assessments have been framed after service of show cause notices, it would be open to the petitioners to challenge the same by filing appeal within a period of sixty days from the date of this order and the State shall not raise the question of limitation. C.W.P. No. 127 of 1980 is also dismissed as in this case even a show cause notice had not been issued. C.W.P. No. 5771 of 1987 is also dismissed. However, the appeal pending against the order of assessment shall be disposed of acc....