HIRJI GOVINDJI IN RE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant is a registered dealer having his head office at Jabalpur and branch offices at Damoh and Sagar. His grievance is in respect of the assessment for the first "quarter" (1st June, 1947, to 12th November, 1947,) after the coming into force of the Sales Tax Act.

(2.) OF the four grounds on which revision has been sought, one has not been pressed. This is in respect of a sum of Rs. 487-2-9, which the dealer recovered from buyers as "sales tax" along with what, for the sake of convenience, may be called the "sale price proper". The inclusion of this amount in the taxable turnover was objected to on the ground that the Act did not provide for the levy of "tax on tax". This point has already been decided by the Board in Ballabhdas v. The State ((1951) N.L.J. 515; 3 S.T.C. 13) where the contention has been held invalid and has, therefore, been rejected.

(3.) THE third ground is in respect of a sum of Rs. 80,047-2-3 re-presenting the turnover of sales effected on orders received prior to 1st June, 1947, the date on which the Act came into force. It has been argued that the amount is not liable to assessment, in view of the proviso to Section 4(1) of the Act; and, even if it should be held otherwise, the case for exemption has been urged under Section 4(1) itself. Now, under the proviso, no tax is payable "on sales made in the course of the execution of a contract, which is shown to the satisfaction of the Commissioner to have been entered into before the commencement of this Act." The word "contract" has been defined in a special sense in clause (b) of Section 2, which is reproduced below :