AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (8) TMI 105
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he first question unanswered and answered the second question in favour of the assessee. 3.The appellant, a Statutory Corporation, engaged in the purchase and sale of foodgrains, is an assessee registered under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") at Amritsar. The appellant filed its quarterly returns in forms ST-XIII and ST-VIII-A showing gross turnovers at Rs. 76,26,49,211.19 and Rs. 5,88,00,715.78 respectively. Deductions were claimed in respect of sales of tax free goods and sales made to the registered dealers. Dissatisfied with the returns filed, the Assessing Authority issued statutory notice in form ST-XIV under Section 11(2) of the Act requiring the appellant to produce their accounts. In r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and refer the questions for its opinion. In compliance of the said order, the Tribunal by order dated 15-9-1989 referred two questions of law for the opinion of the High Court which are as under : "(1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the expenses incurred by the State or Agencies of the Food Corporation of India after acquiring or purchasing the goods before delivery to the petitioner-dealer could form part of gross turnover and be subjected to tax? (2) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, could the market fee be included in the purchase turnover in view of (1980) 46 STC 477 (Anand Swarup Mahesh Kumar v. Commissioner of Sales Tax)?" The High Court by the impugned order dated 8-2-2007 concluded that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act and therefore the High Court ought not to have avoided or declined the said question. The counsel also pointed out that enough material/factual basis was available in the order passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the Tribunal, hence, the High Court erred in observing that there was no factual basis for the first question. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - State of Punjab supported the decision of the High Court and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6.It is relevant to mention that when the FCI filed an application for reference, pointing out certain questions of law for adjudication to the High Court arising out of the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal dated 22-11-1984, by order dated 4-11-1996, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt, the Sales Tax Tribunal, Punjab has no other option but to refer the same to the High Court and by order dated 15-9-1989 rightly referred it. In those circumstances, as rightly pointed out by counsel for the appellant, we are of the view that unless there were very clear reasons, the High Court could not have held that there was no material available in the order of the Tribunal for considering the same. 7.Now let us see whether any factual basis/materials were available in the order of the Tribunal for determining the question posed before the High Court. The counsel for the appellant took us through the order of the Assessing Authority as well as Sales Tax Tribunal. A perusal of the orders of the Assessing Authority, Amritsar, (Annexu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are satisfied that the question of law that arose for decision of the High Court was whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the incidental charges could be treated as a part of taxable turnover and if that is so, as to what should be the correct rate at which the said incidental charges should be calculated. Further, it was brought to our notice that the appellant-Corporation had paid the required tax for the Assessment Year 1975-76 as demanded within the time specified in the demand notice. In the same manner, when on 28-3-2001, the Excise and Taxation Officer had asked the appellant-Corporation to deposit an amount of Rs. 29,52,874.15 before 30-3-2001, the Corporation had deposited the said amount on 28-3-2001. As by this ord....