While examining the accounts of the subsequent year, the Assessing Officer discovered a transaction relating to sale of a film named Nanum Oru Penn to M s. A.V.M. Productions for a companysideration of Rs.
Before the Tribunal in second appeal the question as to whether sale of the incomplete film was goods, as companytemplated under the Act, was raised.
The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer companypleted the assessment for the year 1962 63 by his order dated 6.8.1973.
The reassessment was unsuccessfully challenged in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the Judgment of a Divisional Bench of the Madras High Court in tax Case No.
The Tribunal took into account the definition of the word goods in the Act and kept in view the ratio of the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Meiyappan v. Deputy Commissioner 20 S.T.C. 115 and held that the transaction did number amount to sale.
The revenue carried the matter to the High Court.
Respondent, a firm, is a registered dealer under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1958 hereafter Act for short .
72 of 1968.
As the transaction related to the year 1962 63, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment for the previous year and included the sale price in the turnover, and raised the demand along with penalty.
1,91,903 57 on 30th March, 1963.
