LAWS(ALL)-2005-1-135

COMMISSIONER SALES TAX Vs. SATNA CEMENT WORKS

Decided On January 20, 2005
COMMISSIONER SALES TAX Appellant
V/S
SATNA CEMENT WORKS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 16.8.1990 relating to the assessment year 1981-82 arising out from the proceeding under Section 21.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the dealer opp. party ((hereinafter referred to as 'Dealer') was the manufacturer of Cement having its Factory at Satna in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Dealer was having a Sale Depot at Allahabad and accordingly registered under the U. P. Trade Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act with the Assessing Authority at Allahabad. Dealer had three Dumps in Uttar Pradesh (i) at Dandi, Allahabad (ii) at Kanpur (iii) at Sitapur. From the Dandi Dump, Allahabad delivery of goods were given to the customers at the Dump and no transportation charges were charged separately from the customers In respect of sale from Kanpur Dump and Sitapur Dump, freight charges were charged separately from the customers alleged to be relating to the transportation of goods from the Dump to the customers destination to provide extra facility. During the year under consideration, in the case of sale from Kanpur Dump, a sum of Rs. 12,73,238/- and in respect of sales from Sitapur Dump, a sum of Rs. 43,60,304/- were charged towards freight charges. It appears that in original proceedings freight charged from the customers in respect of sale made from Kanpur Dump and Sitapur Dump have not been considered, therefore, a proceeding under Section 21 was initiated. Assessing Authority held that the aforesaid amount of freight at Rs. 56,33,542/- would be part of the turnover in view of Cement Control Order, inasmuch as, supply was FOR customer destination and levied tax on the said amount. First appeal filed by the dealer was rejected. Dealer filed second appeal before the Tribunal which was allowed vide impugned order.

(3.) Heard Counsel for the parties.