TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 212
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ajasthan Agriculture Produce Marketing Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1961') from its members. 2. Mr. Soni informing that the members of petitioner society are engaged in purchase and sale of timber (Imarti Lakadi), asserted that they are having their shops and godowns etc. outside the Mandi yard and they do not avail any of the facilities or services provided by the respondent - Mandi. 3. Having laid the factual foundation, learned counsel contended that the cess on purchase and sale of timber from the members of the petitioner society is illegal, as the same is not an agricultural produce. While maintaining said argument, he contended that after the introduction of Goods and Service Tax, the impugned cess cannot c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... second list of the VIIth Schedule. It has also been settled by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sreenivasa General Traders & Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors., reported in AIR 1983 SC 1246 that irrespective of the fact, whether a dealer carries on business or trade in the market yard or not, the agriculture produce brought by such dealer in the notified area is exigible to market fee, leviable under the Act. The relevant excerpts from the said judgment runs as under:- "22. There is a fallacy underlying the argument that since the services are rendered by the market committees within the market proper, there is no liability to pay a market fee on purchase or sale taking place in the notified market area but outside the mark....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....akrishnaiah & Sons, Anakapalli, represented by I. Ramakrishana Rao and Ors. v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Food & Agricultural by Penta Kota Sitaram and Ors. I.L.R. [1976] A.P. 878 repelled a similar contention and observed : The argument proceed on the assumption that sales and purchases of notified agricultural produce, livestock and products of livestock in a notified market area could take place even outside the market. That is an unfounded assumption. Section 7(6) of the Act prohibits sales or purchases of notified agricultural produce, livestock and products of livestock outside the market. It says "notwithstanding anything in Sub-section (1), no person shall purchase or sell any notified agricu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n agricultural produce attracting cess or fee; suffice it to observe that this stand too is totally contrary to the provisions contained in the Act of 1961. Section 2 (i) of the Act of 1961, unequivocally provides that items mentioned in the Schedule shall be treated to be an agricultural produce. Product 'timber' has been specifically enumerated at Serial No.9 of Schedule appended with the Act of 1961. This being the fact situation, the timber or 'Imarti Lakadi' is unquestionably an agricultural produce, exigible to Mandi fee under the Act of 1961. 10. Our aforesaid view is fully fortified by the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Vishwakarma Timber Mart vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1984 WLN 402, which re....