SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. SUBBA RAO, C.J.I., J.C. SHAH, J.M. SHELAT, V. BHARGAVA AND G.K. MITTER, JJ.
Appeals), Respondents.
M/s. Devgam Iron and Steel Rolling Mills, Govindgarh, etc., Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab and others (In all Appeals), Respondents.
Prabhudayal Himatsingka and others Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab and another, Respondents.
Punjab Cloth Mills Ltd., Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and another, Respondents.1. Civil Civil Appeals Nos. 526, 527 and 529 of 1964; Civil Appeals Nos. 39 to 43, 81 and 540 of 1965, D/- 10-4-1967.
1. Civil.Appeals Nos. 526, 527 and 529 of 1964
2. Civil Appeals Nos. 39 to 43 of 1965.
3. Civil Appeal No. 81 of 1965.
4. Civil Appeal No. 540 of 1965.
Advocates appeared
Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Senior Advocate (M/s. R. K. Garg and S C. Agarwal, Advocates of M/s. Ramamurthi and Co., with 1898 him), for Appellants (In C. As. Nos. 526, 527 and 529 of 1964), M/s. R. Ganapathy and R. N. Sachthey, Advocates, for Respondents (In C. As. Nos. 526, 527 and 529 of 1964);, M/s. Rameshwarr Nath and Mahinder Narain, Advocates of M/s. Rajinder Narain and Co., for Appellants (In C. As. Nos. 39 to 43 of 1965) M/s. Hardev Singh and R. N. Sachthey, Advocates, for Respondents (In C. As. Nos. 39 to 43 of 1965); Mr. S. T. Desai, Senior Advocate, (Mr. O. C. Mathur, Advocate of M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co., with him) for Appellants (In C. As. Nos. 81 and 540 of 1965). M/s. R. Ganapathy Iyer and R. N. Sachthey, Advocates for Respondents (In C. A. No. 81 of 1965), M/s. O. P. Malhotra and R. N. Sachthey, Advocates, for Respondents (In C. A. No. 540 of 1965).
Judgment
SUBBA RAO, CJI. : The decision on these appeals depends upon the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (Punjab Act XLVI of 1948), as amended by Punjab Act of 1958, relating to three categories of goods, namely, oil-seeds, iron and cotton.
2. The facts may be briefly stated.
3. The assessees in Civil Appeals Nos. 526, 527 and 529 of 1964 carry on business at Moga in Punjab and each owns an oil mill. They purchase oil seeds and, after crushing the same in their oil mills, sell the oil and the residual oil-cake. They are registered dealers under the Act. The Amending Act imposed a purchase tax of 2 per cent on the purchase of oi1-seeds "for the use in the manufacture of goods for sale". This was in addition to the sales-tax leviable on the sales of oil and oil-cake. On June 23, 1959, the Excise and Taxation Officer, Ferozepore, the 3rd respondent in the said appeals issued notices to the 3 appellants-assessees to the effect that they did not submit their returns for the year ending 1958-.39 and failed to pay purchase-tax in respect thereof and asked them to show cause why they should not be prosecuted for the said default. The appellants filed 3 petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Punjab questioning the validity of the relevant provisions of the Act and for appropriate reliefs. A Division Bench of the High Court heard the petitions, along with other connected petitions and dismissed the petitions of the appellants so far as they related to purchase-tax on oil seeds. Hence the appeals.
4. Civil Appeals Nos. 39 to 43 of 1965 relate to purchase-tax on iron. The appellants carry on business in rolling steel at Gobindgarh. They purchase steel scrap and steel ingots and convert them into rolled steel sections. Under the Act, the assessing authority imposed purchase-tax at the rate of 2 per cent on the purchase of steel scrap and steel ingots made by them during the period April 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 for making rolled steel section and selling the same. The appellants filed petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court for appropriate writs for quashing the orders of the assessing authorities and for prohibiting them from levying purchase-tax on the goods purchased and for refund of the tax illegally collected from them. A Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the petitions. Hence the appeals.
5. Appeals Nos. 81 of 1965 and 540 of 1965 relate to purchase-tax on cotton. The appellants in Civil Appeal No. 81 of 1965 are the trustees of Birla Education Trust. They own a cotton and textile mill Bhiwani. They purchase cotton from various dealers in Punjab and outside for the manufacture of yarn and cloth. By an order, dated March 11, 1962, the District Taxation Officer, Hissar, imposed purchase-tax on the appellants in respect of the cotton purchased by them for the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60. The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 540 of 1965 is a limited company carrying on the business of producing and selling yarn. For the purpose of its business it acquires cotton from commission agents. It is a registered dealer under the Act. The Excise and Taxation Officer Hissar, by his order dated November 29, 1961, assessed the appellant to purchase-tax for the assessment year 1958-59 in respect of the cotton purchased by it and so too on January 27, 1962, he had taken proceedings for making assessment to purchase tax for the assessment year 1959-60 in respect of the same commodity. The appellants in both the appeals filed petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court questioning the validity of the said orders. The said writ petitions were dismissed by a division Bench of the High Court. Hence the appeals.
6. We shall at first take the points raised which are common to all the appeals and then proceed to consider the points peculiar to some of the appeals.
7. Mr. M. C. Setalvad, learned counsel appearing for the appellants
Referred : B. Shama Rao v. Union Territory of Pondicherry
M/s. Shinde Brothers v. Deputy Commr.. Raichur
Kesoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commr. of Wealth Tax (Cential) Calcutta
M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co., Ltd. v. Commr. of Income-tax, Punjab
Referred : M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co., Ltd. v. Commr. of Income-tax, Punjab
Union of India v. Delhi Cloth and General Mills
George Oakes (Private) Ltd. v. State of Madras
Vasantlal Maganbhal Sanfanwala v. State of Bombay
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.