RAMJI PRASAD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), at the instance of the assessee, has referred the following question of law to this Court for its opinion and submitted statement of case under Section 33(3) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Bihar Act 19 of 1959) (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") :

(2.) The short facts for disposal of this reference are that the assessee is an unregistered dealer and an agriculturist having 150 bighas of agricultural lands. He used to consume the agricultural produce of his land and the surplus thereof he used to sell in market. He has been assessed as an individual under Section 16(5) of the Act by the Assistant Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, Bettiah (hereinafter referred to as "the assessing officer") in relation to the surplus agricultural produce of his land sold by the petitioner for the period between 2nd February, 1961 and 31st January, 1966 and a penalty of Rs. 100 has been imposed. Against the order of the assessing officer, an appeal was taken before the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Muzaffarpur (hereinafter referred to as "the appellate authority") who dismissed the same and affirmed the order of assessment holding that since the assessee was every year found selling surplus agricultural produce of his land, the sale in question cannot be said to be casual ; as such, the assessee became a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act and is liable to be assessed under the provision of the Act. On revision being taken by the assessee, the aforesaid orders have been affirmed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (hereinafter referred to as "the revisional authority"). On further revision being taken, the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, Patna, has affirmed the aforesaid orders. Thereafter, on an application being filed on behalf of the assessee, the Tribunal has referred the aforesaid question of law to this Court for its opinion under Section 33(3) of the Act.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee contended that the assessee was and is an agriculturist and is being assessed under the provisions of the Bihar Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1938, in relation to the income derived by him by sale of surplus agricultural produce from his land and sales tax cannot be assessed over the aforesaid sales of the assessee as he cannot be treated to be a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act. According to him, these are casual transactions of sale and the assessee is not carrying on any business of sale and purchase of agricultural produce. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue contended that it was not a case of casual sale ; rather the assessee was selling surplus produce of his agricultural land after meeting his personal consumption and each and every year he was making regular sale of his agricultural produce ; as such, he became a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(0 of the Act and, consequently, liable to be assessed under the provisions of the Act.