AMAR KUMAR BIRLEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against three orders of the learned assessing officer and the consequent demand notices for the periods 1986-87, 1989-90 and 1990-91, whereby the photographs taken by the petitioner of various customers on payment as a commercial artist in his studio in the township of Patna were treated to be works contract within the meaning of section 3 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act"). A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the case may be indicated. The petitioner is engaged in the business of sale of photographic materials, and also photographs. He has a studio-cum-shop in the township of Patna. He submitted returns for the period 1986-87. In the returns, gross figure of Rs. 2,83,413.47 is mentioned. The learned Assistant Collector of Commercial Taxes, Patna, being the assessing officer, passed the order of assessment dated April 4, 1988, annexure 2 series, wherein he found the following figures :

(2.) The petitioner raises a grievance before this Court that the sum of Rs. 29,844.05, being the returned figures for the job of photography done by him is not works contract and is, therefore, not exigible to sales tax within the meaning of the Act. He relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rainbow Colour Lab v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2000 118 STC 9.

(3.) The petitioner had also submitted returns for the period 1989-90, and the following figures were determined by the learned assessing officer :