SRINIVASA PRINTING WORKS Vs. STO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised in this original petition has to be resolved on a consideration whether four items of turnover relating to (a) printing of the judgments of the court, (b) printing of letter heads, (c) binding of books and (d) supply of forms, totalling to Rs. 18,490.30 nP. is taxable or not. The assessing authority in the first instance exempted the turnover relating to the transactions. But the Deputy Commissioner purporting to act under S.12(2) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act suo motu revised the original order of assessment and directed a de novo enquiry which resulted in Ext. P-1 order wherein the exemptions claimed have been negatived.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner raised two points before me. According to him, the Deputy Commissioner had no jurisdiction to revise the first order of assessment suo motu. He relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Kerala v. Appukutty ( 1963 KLJ 432 ). I do not think that decision has any application. The revision in this case was not in relation to escaped turnover. It appears to me that the revisional authority was considering the legality of the order. He is entitled to do so.

(3.) Secondly he contended that the turnover relating to the four items mentioned above are not turnovers pertaining to sales and he mainly relied on the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in Guntur Tobaccos Limited v. Government of Andhra (1961 II Andhra WR 37 = XII STC 668. That is a Full Bench decision and if I may so with respect, there is a clear enunciation of the law relating to this subject in the judgment. The learned Judge said: