Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 413 (GAU)

Ghawar Chand Gangh v. State of Assam

2003-09-04

P.G.AGARWAL

body2003
JUDGMENT P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. The two petitioners before us are the registered dealers under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred as "the Act"). The petitioner No. 2, M/s. Dugar Consumer Products Pvt. Ltd., is engaged in the manufacturing of packaging and blending of tea and the petitioner No. 1 is the trader who purchases the tea from petitioner No. 2 for further trade. The petitioners have challenged the order of assessment passed by the Superintendent of Taxes for the year 1994-95 and for the year 1996-97. The said orders were also challenged by the petitioners before the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes, Assam, in revision petition. 2. The case of the petitioners is that, the petitioner No. 2 as an industry was covered by the Assam Industries (Sales Tax Concessions) Scheme, 1995 and as such they were not liable to pay sales tax on purchase of raw materials as well as on sale of finished products. The petitioner No. 1 had purchased the concerned quantity of tea from petitioner No. 2 and thereafter claims that he is not liable to pay tax on the above set of tea. It is further submitted that the petitioner No. 2 purchased the said tea without realising any tax and the liability to pay sales tax was denied on the ground that the purchaser was enjoying the benefits under the Assam Industries (Sales Tax Concessions) Scheme, 1995. 3. In this case the quantum of sale or purchase as such is not in dispute. The question raised here is that whether the petitioner No. 2 can claim exemption from payment of sales tax on the ground that the purchaser from whom he purchased the tea in question was enjoying the benefit of the said Assam Industries (Sales Tax Concessions) Scheme. 4. Under the Act tea is liable for tax on the last point of sale. Thus the tea purchased by the petitioner No. 1 from petitioner No. 2 was the first point of sale and the question that the manufacturer was exempted from payment of tax was immaterial. The tax was payable on the last point of sale and in view of Section 3 of the Act, the liability to pay tax arose on the last point of sale only. The tax was payable on the last point of sale and in view of Section 3 of the Act, the liability to pay tax arose on the last point of sale only. The fact or the statement that the purchaser from whom the tea was purchased, was enjoying the benefit of the concessions under the Assam Industries (Sales Tax Concessions) Scheme has no relevance in the present case. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the decision of the apex Court in the case of Pine Chemicals Ltd. v. Assessing Authority 1993 (67) ELT 25 (SC). The above case does not support the petitioner in any manner. 6. In the result, we find no merit in this writ petition. The liability of the petitioner No. 2 to pay sales tax was rightly adjudicated by the concerned authority and accordingly this writ petition stands dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.