Judgment

SUBBA RAO, J. :- I regret my inability to agree. The facts may be briefly stated. The respondent-Company is a dealer carrying on the business of re-drying in its factory raw tobacco entrusted to it by its customers. Its usual course of business may be described thus : A customer gives to the respondent raw tobacco for re-drying. It re-dries it in its factory, packs it in gunny, waterproof paper, bales, etc., and delivers it to the customer. It charges the customer at a consolidated rate for re-drying and for the packing material supplied by it. The proportionate price of the packing material comes to about 25 per cent of the re-drying charges. For the assessment years 1951-52, 1952-53 and 1953-54, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer assessed the respondent under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, by different orders, on the sale price of the said packing material. The assessee took the question of his liability through a hierarchy of tribunals, but they all confirmed the assessments made by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer. It preferred revisions to the High Court of Andhra at Guntur, and the said High Court allowed the revisions. Hence the present appeals.

2. Mr. A. Ran