Karnataka High Court
Judges : K.Shivashankar Bhat,R.Ramakrishna
KLIC - Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES - Respondent
S. T. R. P. 58 Of 1986
Decided On : 01/28/1991
SALES TAX - PHOTOGRAPHIC BLOCK-MAKER - KARNATAKA SALES TAX ACT, 1957, SECTION 23(1)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a photographic block-maker, contested the assessment of sales tax on the turnover of sales of blocks for the assessment year 1977-1978, claiming that the block-making involved technical skill and expertise and did not amount to a sale attracting sales tax.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the photographic block-making and selling to a customer constituted a contract of sale, satisfying the requisites of sale recognized under the Sale of Goods Act. The court dismissed the revision petition, affirming the liability of the petitioner to be assessed for sales tax.
Issues: The issues revolved around whether the photographic block-making involved technical skill and expertise, and whether the transactions of the petitioner in respect of blocks constituted a sale and were exigible to the levy of tax.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on precedents and legal principles to determine that the essence of the contract was the production of something to be sold to the customer, constituting a contract for the sale of goods. The court emphasized the transfer of absolute or general property in a thing for a price in money as the essential requisite of sale.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, affirming the liability of the petitioner to be assessed for sales tax on the turnover of sales of blocks.
( 1 ) THIS S. T. R. P. is filed under section 23, sub-clause (1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, against the order dated January 9, 1985, passed in S. T. A. No. 798 of 1980 on the file of the karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bangalore, confirming the order dated September 11, 1979, in appeal No. AP/147/79-80/2480 on the file of the Additional Deputy Commissioner of commercial Taxes (Appeals), Bangalore City Division, Bangalore, confirming the order dated march 31, 1979, passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, XVII Circle, Bangalore, for the assessment year April 1, 1977 to March 31, 1978.
( 2 ) THE petitioner is a photographic block-maker who supplied such blocks to his clients according to the specifications and designs of the customers. In relation to the period April 1, 1977 to March 31, 1978, the Commercial Tax Officer, XVII Circle, Bangalore, before whom the petitioner is assessed to sales tax, completed the assessment under the provisions of the karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and levied sales tax on the turnover of sales of blocks. Subsequently, the assessee has filed a revised return of turnover and claimed deductions and exemptions for the sale of metal blocks as the block-making involves technical skill and expertise. Thus it is not a sale attracting the sales tax.
( 3 ) THE assessing authority has rejected this plea and held that the assessee as a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, purchases metal blocks, zinc sheets, films, process engraving plates, copper sheets on "c" forms for use in the manufacture of metal blocks for sale, which goods are authorised under the R. O. issued. Similarly, he purchases the same goods in the local market also from the registered dealer paying local tax for use in the manufacture of metal blocks. All the purchases are vouched and accounted duly in the books of accounts. The assessee after manufacturing metal blocks sells in the State and collects Karnataka sales tax at 4 per cent which is in order.
( 4 ) THE first appellate authority,. e. , the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) on an appeal against this order, has held that : "making of blocks cannot be considered as works contract and therefore, the appellant has rightly declared the sales of blocks during the year and has rightly collected and paid the tax on the said sales which was accepted by the Commercial Tax Officer. "
( 5 ) THE appellant (petitioner herein) has questioned the correctness of these orders before the karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore. The learned Members of the Appellate Tribunal upheld the findings of the first appellate authority and held that the transactions of the petitioner herein in respect of blocks are one of sale and the authorities are justified in accepting the return under section 12 (2) of the Act filed by the petitioner herein declaring the sales of blocks as liable to tax.
( 6 ) NOW the questions that arise for our decision are : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the petitioner is liable to he assessed to sales tax on the supply of photographic blocks to his customers ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the transactions of the petitioner in respect of blocks are one of sale and exigible to levy of tax ? (3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned orders are valid and sustainable in law ?
( 7 ) THE petitioner has contended that the process of "block" making involves technical skill and expertise. After the artwork or the design is received the block-maker has to take a negative film of the art of design from a photographic camera in attractive angles and opaquing conducted wherever necessary which itself is a highly trained and skilful job. The image is then transferred on to the chemically coated photosensitised metal by
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.