Skip to content


Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Arunchand Charandas Chabra - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberM.C.C. No. 61 of 1983
Judge
Reported in[1985]59STC191(MP)
AppellantCommissioner of Sales Tax
RespondentArunchand Charandas Chabra
Advocates:Surjeetsingh, Government Adv.
Cases ReferredMadhya Pradesh v. Jaswant Singh Charan Singh
Excerpt:
- indian penal code, 1890.section 306 :[dalveer bhandari & harjit singh bedi,jj] abetment of suicide deceased, a married woman, committed suicide - allegation of abetment of suicide against appellant husband and in-laws - ocular evidence was sketchy - dying declaration recorded by tahsildar completely exonerated all accused in-laws of any misconduct dispelling any suspicion as to their involvement - letter of threat allegedly written by appellant to father of victim was concocted piece of evidence held, though presumption against appellant can be raised, it cannot be said that onus shifts exclusively and heavily on him to prove his innocence. conviction of appellant is liable to be set aside. .....taxable turnover was determined at rs. 67,000. this taxable turnover determined was in respect of sales of charcoal for the period from 1st april, 1959 to 14th august, 1962. the respondent's contention was that though he was an unregistered dealer he had purchased the charcoal from registered dealers and therefore, an exemption under section 2(r)(ii) should be allowed. this was not accepted by the assessing officer.5. being aggrieved by this order, the respondent filed first appeal before the appellate assistant commissioner of sales tax, indore. the appeal was decided by the appellate assistant commissioner of sales tax by his order dated 2nd december, 1974 and the appeal was rejected.6. being aggrieved by the order of the appellate assistant commissioner of sales tax, indore the.....
Judgment:

P.D. Mulye, J.

1. The Board of Revenue, at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, has made this reference to this Court under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 to answer the following question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal passed on 22nd December, 1975:

Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the turnover of charcoal worth Rs. 67,000 for the period 1st April, 1959 to 14th August, 1962 as not liable to tax in spite of the fact that deduction was not allowable on these sales either under Section 2(r)(ii) or under Section 2(r)(iv) as they stood during the relevant period ?

2. The statement of the case as given out by the Board in the said reference may be stated in brief thus: The respondent M/s. Arunchand Charandas Chabra, deals in firewood and charcoal at Indore. He was assessed to sales tax for the period from 1st April, 1959 to. 31st March, 1967 under Section 18(6) of the said Act by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Indore, Circle-I by his order dated 30th June, 1967. The gross turnover was determined at Rs. 2,00,000 and the taxable turnover was determined at Rs. 1,60,000. Tax was assessed at Rs. 3,200 and penalty under Section 18(6) of the said Act was . imposed at Rs. 2,800. The respondent's claim for exemption on account of tax paid on charcoal up to 14th August, 1962 was not allowed by the assessing officer.

3. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed revision under Section 39(1) of the said Act, which was decided by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore by his order dated 5th October, 1970 who remanded the case to the assessing officer.

4. The respondent was assessed again by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Indore, Circle-I, by his order dated 1st December, 1973. The gross turnover was determined at Rs. 2,49,200 and the taxable turnover was determined at Rs. 67,000. This taxable turnover determined was in respect of sales of charcoal for the period from 1st April, 1959 to 14th August, 1962. The respondent's contention was that though he was an unregistered dealer he had purchased the charcoal from registered dealers and therefore, an exemption under Section 2(r)(ii) should be allowed. This was not accepted by the assessing officer.

5. Being aggrieved by this order, the respondent filed first appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore. The appeal was decided by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax by his order dated 2nd December, 1974 and the appeal was rejected.

6. Being aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore the respondent filed second appeal before the Tribunal. The appeal was decided by the Tribunal on 22nd December, 1975 and the respondent's contention was accepted and tax levied at Rs. 67,000 on account of sales of charcoal was set aside. It is in these circumstances, this reference has been made to this Court.

7. Despite service of notice of the fixed date, none appeared on behalf of the respondent at the hearing of this petition. We have, therefore, heard the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Surjeet Singh, Government Advocate. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that after the decision of the Supreme Court in the decision in Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh v. Jaswant Singh Charan Singh [1967] 19 STC 469 (SC), decided on 23rd February, 1967 which has held that the charcoal is included in the word 'coal', the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1972 (Act No. 61 of 1972) in Section 14(i) has provided 'coal, including coke in all its forms, but excluding charcoal: provided that during the period commencing on the 23rd day of February, 1967 and ending with the date of commencement of Section 11 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1972 (61 of 1972) this clause shall have effect subject to the modification that the words 'but excluding charcoal' shall be omitted.' He, therefore, submitted that in the amendment of Section 14, relating to Clause (i) which deals with coal, the additional words are used 'for Clause (i), the following clause shall be, and shall be deemed always to have been, substituted'. He, therefore, submitted that these words have retrospective effect and consequently the respondent was liable for tax for the period 1st April, 1959 to 14th August, 1962 on the basis of the turnover of charcoal. However, he frankly submitted that this point was never raised before the lower authorities but he is raising this for the first time in this Court. He also submitted that the question referred to is not happily worded.

8. In these circumstances we are of opinion that it is not necessary to consider the case law cited on behalf of the applicant though he also submitted that this Court can suitably amend the question referred to, but in our opinion in the present case, considering the facts and circumstances thereof, it is not necessary to do so and this reference deserves to be disposed of on this short point alone.

9. Our answer, therefore, to the question referred is in favour of the assessee and against the department. Our answer, therefore, is that in the facts and circumstances the of case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the turnover of charcoal worth Rs. 67,000 for the period 1st April, 1959 to 14th August, 1962 as not liable to tax in spite of the fact that deduction was not allowable on these sales either under Section 2(r)(ii) or under Section 2(r)(iv) as they stood during the relevant period. The reference is answered accordingly with no order as to costs.


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