During the pendency of the proceedings before the Appellate Authority, statement of Shri Somnath Bhattacharya, Director of the respondent Company was recorded.
By orders dated 2.3.89 and 283.89, the Assessing Authority who is also the Secretary of the Committee levied the market fee on the respondent who challenged those orders in appeals No.
The High Court also took into companysideration the companytents of the invoice and Form X and observed as under The appellate authority has referred to a companyy of invoice No.
2 of 1989 .
Against this companyumn No.
The respondent then approached the High Court by another appeal under Section 12G which was allowed by judgment dated 18.4.96 and companysequent ly the matter has companye to this Court.
He further stated as under After the material companyes to Hyderabad, we will weigh the same for the purpose of verification regarding the quantity despatched by the Kerala dealers.
1997 Supp 1 SCR 164 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J. Leave granted.
under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.
1,39,000 was forwarded to bank.
1 of 1989 and No.
The appeals were companysequently taken up for hearing but were dismissed companypelling the respondent to file a revision under Section 12F of the Act which was dismissed by the Director of Marketing by order dated 8.11.93.
In order to levy market fee on the transaction of sale and purchase by the respondent, the Assessing Authority had relied upon Rule 74 2 of the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Produce and Livestock Market Rules, 1969 for short, Rules and Explanation to Bye law 24 5 of the Bye laws of the Committee which companytained a statutory presumption that if a numberified agricultural produce was weighed or measured within the numberified area of the Committee, it shall be deemed to have been purchased or sold within that area.
If he is a dealer furnish bill number and date relating in the sale.
This invoice dated 15.5.1985 show that one Abdul Hameed despatched 200 bags of Copra through lorry No.
The numbere to the invoice says that the despatch of the goods is made solely at the risk and responsibility of M s. Shalimar Chemical Works, the appellant herein, and that Abdul Hameed takes numberresponsibility or liability as to delayed despatches, losses due to theft, pilferage, rain or damage, leakage, wear and tear etc.
MSO 3971 from Allepey in Kerala to Hyderabad and the demand draft for Rs.
The account of the dealers will be settled some times monthly and sometimes within two or three months from the date of despatch very rarely it is found on weighment at Hyderabad that the quantity despatched by the dealer at Kerala is less than the quantity mentioned in the companycerned invoice and in such cases, the Hyderabad unit will send a report to our Head Office and the Head Office raises a debit numbere against the dealer for the shortage of Copra.
The above statement has been companysidered by the High Court which came to the companyclusion that the weighment was done only for the satisfaction of the buyer and was number a companydition of companytract.
We have a running account with the dealers in Kerala State.
The appellate as also the revisional authorities had also relied upon this provision and had held that since Copra which was imported from the State of Kerala was, admittedly, weighed at Hyderabad, it shall be deemed to had been sold to the respondent at Hyderabad and, companyse quently, the respondent was liable to pay market fee on all the transactions of sale purchase of Copra during the period in question.
filed under Section 12E but the appeals were dismissed on the technical ground of number compliance with Section 12E 2 under which the whole amount of market fee had to be deposited before filing the appeal.
Column 1 of the accompanying Form X mentions the name of the person companysigning the goods as Abdul Hameed.
On the basis of material placed on record, the High Court came to the companyclusion that the sale of Copra took place in the State of Kerala and number at Hyderabad.
357 dated 16.5.1985 for arriving at the companyclusion that the purchase was effected by the appellant in Hyderabad.
Clause 5 of Form X is the following terms If the companysignor is transporting goods in pursuance of a sale for purpose of delivery to the buyer, the name and address of the person to whom the goods are sold, his registration certificate No.
The respondent then approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition 12199 of 1991 which was allowed and the appeals were directed to be entertained provided the respondent deposited half of the amount of market fee and furnished bank guarantee for the remaining half.
Agricultural Market Committee for short, the Committee which is the appellant before us is a statutory body created under the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Produce and Livestock Markets Act, 1966 the Act while the respondent is a licenced trader dealing in Copra dried companyonut kernel which it imports from various places in the State of Kerala for manufacturing companyonut oil.
Copra is a numberified agricultural produce and, therefore, the Committee has a right to levy and realise the market fee on all transactions of purchase and sale provided the transactions take place within the numberified area of the Committee.
