MODERN PRINTERS Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tax case revision, at the instance of the assessee, questions the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 18, 1998 made in C.T.A. No. 392 of 1994.

(2.) The petitioner is carrying on a business in printing materials on works contract basis. For the assessment year 1992-93, the Commercial Tax Officer, Udumalpet, subjected the petitioner, on a turnover of Rs. 4,53,040 to sales tax at five per cent treating the transaction as outright sale of printed materials overruling the plea of the petitioner that the transactions are by way of execution of works contract. Besides levy of sales tax, the petitioner was also subjected to penalty under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (for short "the Act") for the alleged excess collection of sales tax at eight per cent instead of five per cent. The appeal preferred by the petitioner to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was rejected and the further appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was also rejected. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present revision.

(3.) Mr. B. Ravindran, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that inasmuch as the petitioner undertakes only contract works for executing the orders placed by the customers by printing bill books, labels, letter pads, ledgers, etc., the finding that the petitioner is manufacturing and selling the products in the open market and consequently is liable to be taxed accordingly is erroneous. The learned Counsel would also submit that in any case, though the materials were placed before both the first appellate authority as well as the appellate Tribunal to sustain the plea that the petitioner undertakes only contract works on work contract basis, the same were not considered. Non-application of mind on the part of the first appellate authority as well as the appellate Tribunal on those materials would vitiate the order, apart from the fact that both the appellate authority and the Tribunal has merely followed the finding of the assessing authority without independent application of mind.