SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Kar) 93

JAGANNATHA SHETTY, S.A.HAKEEM
B. GIRIJA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J.

( 1 ) THESE two revision petitions raise a short but interesting question, namely, whether the photostat copies taken from the xerox machine and supplied by the petitioner to the customers would amount to sale under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957.

( 2 ) ALL the authorities below have held that the supply of photostat copies amounts to sale. The unreasonableness, if not the absurdity, of this view could be well presented by a mere narration of the facts. Smt. B. Girija, the petitioner, is the owner of a xerox machine with the establishment called "speed-O-Prints". She takes out and gives copies of documents from the said machine to those who need it on payment of some charges. For the assessment years 1975-76 and 1977-78, the petitioner declared certain turnover, but said that that turnover was not taxable since it did not represent sale transactions. The Commercial Tax Officer, however, assessed the turnover to tax and also levied penalty under section 12-B (2) of the Act on the ground that the tax along with the monthly statements in form No. 3 has not been regularly paid. The appeals preferred against that order have been dismissed by the Additional Dep







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top