STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. ASSOCIATED STONE INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is proposed to dispose of the above two revision petitions by this common order as they hinge on the same point which relates to the expenses alleged to have been incurred by the opposite party in procuring the wagons and in the delivery of goods. The learned Dy. Commissioner Excise & Taxation has held that these expenses could be taken to be overhead or incidental charges which was necessary expenditure to be incurred and that the purchaser had knowledge of it and had agreed to pay them separately as such. Accordingly these charges could not be part of the sale price and were not subject to tax.

(2.) IN coming to this conclusion, the learned Dy. Commissioner has relied on Rajkumar Biswas vs. Gopalganj INdustrial Bank Ltd. (A. I. R. 1937 Cal. 415) and Nabhi Brother vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax Officer (1960 S. T. C. 605 ).