AVON ELASTOMERS (INDIA) Vs. COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX

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 15.04.2006 relating to assessment year 1999 -2000 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the applicant was sole Selling Agent of M/S T.P. R. Compound, Ahmedabad in the State of U.P. and is registered under the U.P. Trade Tax Act as well as Central Sales Tax Act with the Assessing Authority, Agra. It appears that the goods were received by way of stock transfer from Principal M/S T. P.R. Compound and the same were sold within the State of U.P. to various parties. It appears that in bill, applicant has charged the value of the goods fixed by the Principal and the amount of freight relating to the transportation of goods from Ahmedabad to Agra. Applicant claimed that the freight from Ahmedabad to Agra since being charged separately in the bill, would not be a part of the turnover in view of Explanation of Section 2 (i) of the Act which defines 'Turnover'. The Assessing Authority had not accepted the plea of the applicant and included the amount of freight relating to transportation of the goods from Ahmedabad to Agra in the turnover and levied the tax accordingly. The order of the Assessing Authority in this regard, has been confirmed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Trade Tax Agra and by the Tribunal in the impugned order.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant submitted that since the amount of freight had been charged separately in the bill from the customers, therefore, it would not be the part of the turnover in view of Explanation -II of Section 2 (i) of the Act, which defines the 'Turnover'. He relied upon the decision of Apex Court in the case of Vinod Coal Syndicate v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. Lucknow reported in 1988 UPTC page 218. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that under Explanation -II of Section 2 (i). 'Turnover' means the aggregate amount for which goods are supplied or distributed by way of sale. He submitted that admittedly, the goods were sold at Agra after taking the delivery of the goods by the applicant to the various parties. Thus, the aggregate amount for which, the goods were supplied includes freight relating to the transportation of the goods from Ahmedabad to Agra, inasmuch as, for sale at Agra, it was obligation of the applicant to transport the goods from Ahmedabad to Agra and to pay freight. He submitted that under Explanation -II to Section 2 (i) exclusion of freight relates to those freight which have been charged at the instance of buyer for further delivery of the goods from Selling Point to the buyer destination In support of his contention, he relied upon the decisions of this Court in the cases of Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow v. S/S Sharma Coal Company, Azamgarh reported in 2005 NTN page 69, 2005, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Rampati Tewari reported in 2005 UPTC 76 and Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow v. S/S Yardhaman Trading Company, Meerut reported in 2006 NTN (Vol. 29) 96.