MODIPON LTD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal, on being moved by the assessee by an application under section 69 (1) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, has referred the following three questions for our decision : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the applicant was not entitled to claim the reduction of the disputed amount of Rs. 6,51,959 during the assessment year 1973-74, on the ground that the actual sales against which the price reduction was effected by the applicant had taken place in the subsequent year of account, that is, 1974-75 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the disputed amount did not constitute 'trade discount' but was merely a rebate or remission which did not affect the applicant's sale price of the goods sold in the year 1974-75 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the reduction of the disputed amount which the applicant had allowed in the year 1974-75, by charging concessional price for the sale of goods, did not constitute a trade discount but was in the nature of export assistance given to the relevant two purchasers, by charging the sale price at the reduced rate in respect of their subsequent purchases ? It is not necessary to state the facts which have led to the making of this reference, except that the second appeal which was filed before the Tribunal was in respect of the assessment for the accounting year March 1, 1973 to February 28, 1974. Obviously, the claim for reduction for Rs. 6,61,595 should not have been made during assessment year 1973-74. As the price reduction was effected in the subsequent year, the said claim could possibly be considered while finalising the assessment for the year 1974-75. But we are not concerned with that question. Obviously, it could not have been considered in the year 1973-74. For that reason, we hold that the Tribunal was right in holding that the applicant was not entitled to claim reduction of the disputed amount of Rs. 6,51,595 during the assessment year 1973-74. As regards question Nos. (2) and (3), we are of the view that they really did not arise before the Tribunal inasmuch as they were beyond the scope of the appeal as the appeal itself was preferred in respect of the assessment order passed for the year March 1, 1973 to February 28, 1974. The Tribunal really ought not to have gone into those questions while entertaining the appeal for the assessment year 1973-74. As it will not be proper to answer questions while entertaining the appeal for the assessment year 1973-74. As it will not be proper to answer questions which do not really arise for consideration, we decline to answer questions Nos. (2) and (3 ). For the reasons stated above, question No. (1) is answered in the affirmative, that is, against the assessee and in favour of the department and question Nos. 2 and 3 are not answered. This reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. Reference disposed of accordingly. .