Skip to content


P. Anwar Badsha Sahib and Company and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberAssessments Nos. 657/51-52 and 4241/52-53 and T.R.C. Nos. 53, 54 and 55 of 1956
Judge
Reported in[1958]9STC546(AP)
ActsMadras General Sales Tax Act - Sections 12B(1); Madras General Sales Tax Rules - Rule 13C(1)
AppellantP. Anwar Badsha Sahib and Company and anr.
RespondentState of Andhra Pradesh
Advocates:K. Mangachari, Adv. for ;R.S. Venkatachari, ;A.V. Rangam and ;D.V. Sastry, Advs.
DispositionPetition dismissed
Excerpt:
sales tax - exemption - section 12b (1) of madras general sales tax act and rule 13c (1) of madras general sales tax rules - petitioners claimed exemption on ground that they purchased materials from unlicensed dealers - unable to prove that purchase made from unlicensed dealers - onus of proving the circumstances which warrant exemption is on petitioner - held, unless petitioner proves that he purchased materials from unlicensed dealers he cannot claim exemption. - .....cases, the petitioners claim exemption from sales tax on the ground that they purchased the skins and hides from unlicensed dealers and as such the transaction comes within the purview of the full bench decision of this court in government of andhra pradesh v. abdul bari & co. (1958 9 s.t.c. 231; 1958 a.l.t. 185). the department assessed the petitioners on the basis of the total turnover. when appeals were pending before the sales tax appellate tribunal against the orders of the department, the full bench rendered the judgment referred to above. on the strength of that judgment, the tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees who could prove that the purchases in question were made by them from unlicensed dealers. as regards the petitioners in these cases, their claims were.....
Judgment:

Chandra Reddy, Offg. C.J.

1. In these revision cases, the petitioners claim exemption from sales tax on the ground that they purchased the skins and hides from unlicensed dealers and as such the transaction comes within the purview of the Full Bench decision of this Court in Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Abdul Bari & Co. (1958 9 S.T.C. 231; 1958 A.L.T. 185). The department assessed the petitioners on the basis of the total turnover. When appeals were pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal against the orders of the department, the Full Bench rendered the judgment referred to above. On the strength of that judgment, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees who could prove that the purchases in question were made by them from unlicensed dealers. As regards the petitioners in these cases, their claims were disallowed as, in the opinion of the Tribunal, the petitioners had not established that the purchases were made from unlicensed dealers. No exception can be taken to the decision of the Tribunal. It is for a person who claims exemption to prove the circumstances which warrant the exemption. Consequently, he has to make out that the skins and hides in question were bought from persons who did not hold any licences. There is no presumption that every dealer in hides and skins is an unlicensed dealer. That being the case, unless he succeeds in proving that the persons from whom he purchased the skins and hides had no licences, he cannot claim the exemption.

2. In the result, the orders under appeal are confirmed and these petitions are dismissed with costs, which we fix at Rs. 50 in each petition.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //