THOMSON PRESS INDIA LTD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the printing of lottery tickets amount to the execution of a works contract? Is the State of Haryana competent to levy sales tax on "transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of a works contract" where the order for printing of lottery tickets has been placed by another State? These are the two primary questions that arise in the two review applications and the three Civil Writ Petitions that have been listed before this Bench.

(2.) M/s. Thomson Press (India) Pvt. Ltd. Faridabad, is a registered dealer under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (20 of 1973) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It is engaged in printing of books, periodicals, magazines, annual reports of the companies, brochures, folders and lottery tickets etc. The work undertaken by the petitioner involves use of advanced technology, sophisticated machinery and technically trained personnel. The petitioner is required to maintain a high degree of confidentiality to the satisfaction of its customers. The petitioner filed its sales tax returns. it claimed deduction of certain amounts on the ground that lottery tickets were exempt from the payment of sales tax. Its claim for exemption was allowed. Later on, the Revisional Authority -cum -Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, re -opened certain assessments and issued notices under the State Act as also under the Central Act. It was observed that printing of tickets did not amount to sale of lottery tickets. The petitioner was, therefore, called upon to show cause why the assessment order be not revised. In respect of the assessment year 1986 -87, the assessing authority has framed the assessment and held that the petitioner was liable to pay Rs. 30,12,159/ - under the State Act and Rs. 31,01,917/ -under the Central Act. The petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 337 of 1992. A copy of the assessment order dated January 14, 1992 passed by the assessing authority was placed on record as Annexure P -l. The petitioner filed five other writ petitions. In all these petitions, the provisions of the amending Act and the notices issued by the revisional authority were challenged. In Civil Writ Petition No. 337 of 1992, even the validity of the amending Act and the notices issued by the revisional authority were challenged. All these six writ petitions filed by the petitioners were listed for hearing alongwith a bunch of other writ petitions filed by different petitioners including the East India Cotton manufacturing company, Faridabad. The petitions were disposed of by the full Bench to which two of us (Jawahar Lal Gupta, and N.K. Sodhi, JJ.) were parties. The Bench inter alia held that the impugned provisions were inter vires, the value of goods falling within the purview of various clause of Clause (j) and (1) of Sec. 2 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 is exigible to tax; the inter state sale is outside the scope of State Act for the purposes of levying of tax and that the particular activity of processing of grey cloth by the East India Cotton Manufacturing Company amounted to inter -State sale in the facts and circumstances of the case. The matter was remitted to the assessing authority for fresh decision. The petitioner has filed a review application No. 147 of 1993 with the prayer that the order of assessment be set aside and directions be given to the assessing authority to re -decide the case.

(3.) The State of Haryana has also filed a Review Application No. 205 of 1993. It has been prayed that the conclusion recorded by the Bench that the activity "of processing of grey cloth into finished cloth by the East India Cotton Manufacturing Company in the facts and circumstances of the case amounts to inter -state sale" suffers from an error apparent on the record and be rectified.