The High Court, following an earlier judgment in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras Division, v. Manohar Brothers 1 modified the order holding that if the selling dealer within the State produces a certificate in Form C setting out one or more of the purposes in S. 8 3 b of the Act, and if the Sales Tax authorities on behalf of the State do number deny that the purchasing dealer is a registered dealer, the selling dealer will number be denied the companycessional rate of tax under the Act, even if it transpires that the purchasing dealer has utilised the goods for purposes other than those mentioned in the certificate of registration.
42,080/ set out the purpose as manufacture of electrical energy and since this was number one of the purposes mentioned in S. 8 3 b of the Act as it stood at the relevant time, the Sales Tax authority was right in denying the benefit of the rate under S. 8 1 to the assessee, but with regard to a turnover of 1 13 S.T.C. 686.
In the view of the Tax Officer benefit of the companycessional rate companyld number be claimed in respect of those sales, since the tractors were number for resale and the tractors were number directly relatable to the manufacturing process.
tended for use in the manufacture of tea for sale.
170 of 1961 Civil Revision Petition No.
105 of 1961 and Tax Case No.
153 of 1963 respectively.
The order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was companyfirmed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras.
Another 16 S.T.C. 563, referred to.
Bishan Narain and A. V. Rangam, for the appellants in C.As.
Appeals by Special Leave from the judgment and orders dated January 1, 1963, November 7, 1962 and November 4, 1963 of the Madras High Court in Tax Case No.
The facts which give rise to Civil Appeal No.
334, 335 and 338 of 1965.
335 are these M s Stanes Motors South India Ltd. respondents in this appeal are dealers in automobiles, tractors and spare parts.
1,38,572/12/ resulting from sale of tractors supplied to certain tea factories in the State of Kerala.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
334 and 335 of 1965 .
For the year 1957 58 they claimed benefit of companycessional rates under s. 8 1 on a turnover of Rs.
D. Karkhanis, O.C. Mathur, J.B. Dadachanji and Ravinder Narain,for the respondents in C.As.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. This is a group of appeals filed by the State of Madras against orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras which raises the following companymon question as to applicability of companycessional rate of sales tax to transactions of inter State sale and taxable under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 When a purchasing dealer in one State furnishes in Form C prescribed under the Central Sales Tax Registration Turnover Rules, 1957, to the selling dealer in another State a declaration, certifying that the goods ordered, purchased or supplied are companyered by the certificate of registration obtained by the purchasing dealer in Form B prescribed under r. 5 1 of the Central Sales Tax Registration Turnover Rules, 1957, and that the goods are intended for resale, or for use in manufacture of goods for sale, or for use in the execution of companytracts, or for packing of goods for resale, and that, declaration is produced by the selling dealer, is it open to the Sales Tax authority under the Central Sales ax Act to deny to the selling dealer the benefit of companycessional rates under s. 8 1 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
We may briefly set out the facts which give rise to two out of the appeals Civil Appeals Nos.
M s Radio Electricals Ltd., respondents in this appeal on business in the State of Madras in electrical equipment and are registered as dealers under the Central Sales Tax Act.
335 and 338/1965 .
338/1965 .
The purchasing dealers who were four tea factories registered as dealers under the Act delivered to the respondents certificates in Form C declaring that the tractors purchased by them were in.
The Bombay State Electricity Board, Saurashtra Division, which is engaged in the production of electric energy purchased transformers and other goods of the total value of Rs.
The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer rejected the claim on the ground that the Bombay State Electricity Board was number a dealer engaged in selling goods and merely because they held a registration certificate, the goods sold to the Board companyld number be admitted to the companycessional rate of tax under S. 8 1 of the Act.
The Appeal late Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes companyfirmed the order on the ground that transformers and other goods purchased by the Electricity Board for use in the production of electrical energy were number intended, to be used in the manufacture of goods for sale within the meaning of S. 8 3 b of the Central Sales Tax, Act, because electricity was number at the material time goods within the meaning of the Act.
47,340/ the Sales Tax authority was bound to accept the certificates in Form C produced by the assessee even though the certificates companytained all the purposes mentioned in the prescribed form, and numberpurpose was struck out.
V. Rangam, for the appellant in C.A. No.
on the view that the certificate in Form C mentions more purposes than one for which the goods are intended to be used, or that the goods are incapable of being used for the purpose for which they are declared to be purchased, or that the goods are applied for some other purpose number mentioned in the certi ficate in Form C?
R. Chaudhuri, for the respondent in C. A. No 334/1965 .
1,42,020/ from M s. Radio Electricals Ltd. and the latter claimed in proceeding for assessment for Central sales tax for the year 1957 58 that they were liable to pay tax at the rate of 1 per cent on the turnover under S. 8 1 of the Central Sales Tax Act.
334 335 of 1965.
334 of 1965.
Civil Appeal No.
In appeal, the order passed by the Tax Officer was companyfirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
