PRABHAGIYA VIPNAN PRABANDHAK UTTARAKHAND FOREST DEVELOPMENT RAMNAGAR Vs. COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference has been made to the Larger Bench by the Division Bench vide order dtd. 21/4/2023. Insofar as, it is relevant, the order of reference reads as follows:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the revisionist has placed the judgment of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Commercial Tax Revision No.23 of 2023, Prabhagiya Vipran Prabandhak Uttarakhand Van Vikas Nigam v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Uttarakhand, Dehradun, decided on 22/4/2022. He submits that, while deciding the said CTR, this Court has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in M/s Anand Swarup Mahesh Kumar v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, (1980) 4 SCC 451, wherein the Supreme Court- while dealing with a case arising out of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, examined the nature of charge i.e. market fees payable by the purchaser under the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 (U.P. Act No.XXV of 1964) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Adhiniyam'). While considering the issue whether the market fees and dami payable to the Commission Agent operating within the market area established under the Adhiniyam, could be included in the turnover of purchases of the appellant firm, (which was carrying on the business as a dealer defined in the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948), (for the purpose of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948), the Supreme Court held that the market fee or Mandi Shulk could not be included in the turnover of purchases of the dealer.

(3.) The submission is that the Supreme Court examined Sec. 17(iii)(b) of the Adhiniyam which empowered the Market Committee to levy and collect market fees payable on transactions of sale of specified agricultural produce in the market area. The manner of realization of market fees, as stipulated in Sec. 17(iii)(b) of the Adhiniyam, after the amendment by virtue of U.P. Act No.7 of 1973, w.e.f. 12/6/1973, was as follows:-