TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1354
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....015 for the assessment year 2003-04 under Section 10 (B)) of Trade Tax Act, by which demand of tax on transfer of right to use of telephone handset by the customers of the assessee in the aforesaid assessment year, were raised. The following questions of law have been raised in the aforesaid revisions:- "(i) Whether, the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Trade Tax Pilibhit is wholly illegal in view of the judgement of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Union of India reported in 2006 NTN (Vol. 29) 307 ? (ii) Whether, the assessing authority having even followed the direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court 2003 UPTC 404, as such the determination of turnover and tax under the assessment order is wholly ille....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reference to any question of law. At the stage of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee has sought to press the following question of law: "(i) Whether the orders impugned are bad in the light of decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others, reported in JT 2006 (6) page 114? (ii) Whether in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Court vide judgment dated 02.03.2006, there is any tax liability of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. on rental charged by it from its subscribers? (iii) Whether the authorities below are bound to follow the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others (Writ P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acts of the present case. The charges received by the assessee, have been described as service charge received for service rendered. In connection with same, it had been specifically submitted that there was no element of sale involved. 8. Those being the grounds of appeal as have also been noted in the order of the Tribunal, it appears that the Tribunal has recorded a simplistic reasoning and rejected the contention of the assessee. According to the Tribunal since the assessee had charged a fixed amount, there was inherent consideration for transfer of right to use telephone instruments. Also, the Tribunal has recorded that the assessee had itself disclosed its receipts as rental amount. Therefore, it was clear that the amount rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olved providing service. Therefore, unless such bifurcation or apportionment is found to be permissible in law and unless such bifurcation was actually done, the exact assessment of the tax liability of the assessee would remain illusive or undetermined. 11. Similarly, in so far as the liability of SIM cards is concerned, in the case of BSNL Vs. State of U.P. and others (Sales/Trade Tax Revision No.1311 of 2008) after taking into account the decisions of Supreme Court in the Cases of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., (2006) 3 SCC 1 (para 87) and Idea Mobil Communication Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. & C., Kochin, 2011 UPTC 985, the matter was remitted to the Tribunal to pass a fresh order. Similar treatment is warranted....