TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 696
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts of the revisions are that the assessee is a Department of the Central Government who is engaged in the manufacturing and sale of drugs. Opium is a raw material for manufacturing of various drugs. So, opium is cultivated by the farmers on behalf of the Central Government and for such cultivation, a licence is granted by the Central Government through Narcotics Commissioner to various cultivators. It is also claimed that each and every opium poppy is accounted for on account of the Central Government. For violation of the direction or selling the opium to another person is a punishable offence against the cultivator. Thus, the cultivator has no right over the opium. It is claimed by the Department that there is no sale or purchase acti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase of Civil Appeal No. 4354 of 2000 dated September 28, 2005, Union of India v. Sales Tax Officer, Ghazipur. He also relied on the ratio laid down in the case of Board of Revenue v. A.M. Ansari [1976] 38 STC 577 (SC). But he submits that the honourable Supreme Court did not discuss the licence part. So, the judgment of the case is not applicable in the instant case. On the other hand, Sri H.P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that the honourable Supreme Court has observed in the above-mentioned case that the sale of the opium to the Narcotic Department is taxable item. For this purpose, the honourable Supreme Court has discussed the ratio laid down in the case of Vishnu Agencies (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Commercial Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oice where the ordinary mechanism of proposal and acceptance operates." The learned counsel also relied on the ratio laid down in the case of Coffee Board, Karnataka, Banglore v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Karnataka [1988] 70 STC 162 (SC); [1988] SCC (Tax) 308, where it was observed by the honourable apex court that (pages 197 and 198 in 70 STC): "47. The coffee growers being agriculturists are not dealers and therefore are not liable to pay any sales tax or purchase tax, it was submitted. The demand for purchase tax is in effect a demand on the growers who were exempt from such levy, as the monies required for paying the tax if the same is lawful has necessarily to come out of the monies otherwise payable to the growers. The o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of sale takes place. No such prior agreement existed in this case. 49. In New India Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bihar [1963] 14 STC 316 (SC); [1963] Supp 2 SCR 459, Hidayatullah, J. as the Chief Justice then was, observed that so long as the parties trade under controls at fixed price and accept these as any other law of the realm because they must be deemed to have contracted at a fixed price both sides having or deemed to have agreed to such price. Consent under the law of contract need not be expressed, it can be implied. This is the position under the scheme of the Coffee Act. It has to be emphasised like the Vishnu Agencies' case [1978] 42 STC 31 (SC); [1978] 2 SCR 433, a person for all practical purposes ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncerned with the interest imposed under section 8(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. After hearing both the parties, it appears that section 8, sub-clause (1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 deals regarding the interest. On reproduction, the said provision reads as under: "8(1). Payment and recovery of tax.-The tax admittedly payable shall be deposited within the time prescribed or by 31st day of August, 1975, whichever is later, failing which simple interest at the rate of (fourteen per cent per mensem) shall become due and be payable on the unpaid amount with effect from the day immediately following the last date prescribed or till the date of payment of such amount, whichever is later, and nothing contained in section 7 shall pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not claim that he is liable only from the date of the assessment order fixing the correct rate of tax. 18. Similarly, in a case where the dealer has taken a chance and it has been held that the tax is payable under the Act, the same becomes payable from the date when it was due." In the light of above well-settled legal position, the charging of the interest is mandatory. When it is so, then there is no merit in the revisions filed by the Narcotic Department for the wavier of the interest. So, by upholding the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal, all the revisions in question are hereby dismissed. III. Trade Tax Revision Nos. 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105 and 106 of 1996 have been filed by the Department against the impug....