LAWS(ALL)-1969-7-3

CHHOTEY LAL BISHWANATH Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER

Decided On July 17, 1969
CHHOTEY LAL BISHWANATH Appellant
V/S
SALES TAX OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS and the connected references under the U.P. Sales Tax Act have been submitted by the Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow, at the instance of M/s. Chhotey Lal Bishwanath of Barabanki for the opinion of this court on the following two common questions of law :

(2.) THE assessee is a dealer in food-grains, oil-seeds and gur. The assessment years involved are 1959-60 and 1960-61. For the two assessment years in question, the assessee claimed that besides carrying on business on his own behalf he had also acted as a purchasing agent in that capacity had supplied goods worth Rs. 1,14,229.60 to the U.P. principals and goods worth Rs. 5,21,313.73 to the ex-U.P. principals in the year 1959-60 and similarly had supplied goods worth Rs. 1,24,640.41 and Rs. 3,58,212.82 to his U.P. and ex-U.P. principals respectively in the assessment year 1960-61. He claimed that he was not liable to tax either under the U.P. Sale Tax Act or under the Central Sales Tax Act in respect of the supplies mead by him as purchasing agent. This claim of the assessee was not accepted by the Sales Tax Officer who included in his turnover liable to tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act the value of goods supplied to the U.P. principals and in his taxable turnover liable to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act the value of supplies made to the ex-U.P. principals. The assessee than filed four different appeals - two in respect of each year - one under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and the other under the Central Sales Tax Act. The appellate authority accepted his contention and allowed the appeals holding that the assessee had in fact acted as a purchasing agent and he, therefore, excluded from the taxable turnover the amounts relating to the supplies made by him in that capacity.

(3.) THE contention of the assessee is that the Judge (Revisions) was not justified in law in remanding the cases to the Sales Tax Officer inasmuch as the appellate authority had examined the matter thoroughly and had referred to all the relevant materials.