2014 (4) TMI 594

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kavitha K.T. ORDER 1. The appellant is the registered brand owner of 'CRYPTM'. Pursuant to an agreement dated 01.04.1995 entered into between the appellant and the manufacturing company viz. M/s. Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturing company had license and right to use the appellant's name 'CRYPTM'. 2. The assessing authority had completed the assessments for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hile partly allowing the appeal has reduced the extent of tax already paid at any previous point of sale. 5. Aggrieved by the order so passed by the Tribunal, the appellant preferred Sales Tax Revision before the High Court. The High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the appellant/assessee. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order, the appellant/assessee is before us in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....les. It is an admitted position that the goods manufactured by M/s. Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd. in the brand name holder, namely the appellant/assessee falls under Item 39 of the First Schedule to the Act. Therefore, it is single point levy and the levy is at the point of sale. 9. Since the interpretation of Section 5(2) of the Act is required, the said section is extracted by us. It reads as under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....holder or the trade mark holder shall be the first sale for the purpose of the Act. 10. The aforesaid sub-section commences with a non-obstante clause, i.e., irrespective of section 5(1) of the Act or any other provision under the Act. The said sub-Section speaks of a sale made by a brand name holder or the trade mark holder within the State. The Legislature deems that such a sale by the brand ....