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

1991 Supreme(Mad) 471

KANAKARAJ, A.S.ANAND
Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:S. V. Subramaniam, Chitra Venkataraman, Advocates.

Judgment :-

KANAKARAJ, J.

The assessee in all the tax cases is the same, but they relate to three assessment years, viz., 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. In all the assessment years, the assessee is seeking to exclude from the taxable turnover, packing charges, labour charges and excise duty. So far as excise duty is concerned it relates only to the year 1975-76, and the inclusion of the same is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, we omit to consider the claim relating to excise duty.

2. The assessing authority held that packing charges and the labour charges for packing were eligible for exemption under a Notification G.O.Ms. No. 3291, Revenue, dated October 1, 1960 only up to January 30, 1974. Therefore in the assessment year 1973-74 he had included the turnover under these headings for the period from January 30, 1974 to March 31, 1974. The assessing authority held that packing charges and labour charges for packing would certainly attract liability because these charges are incurred by the dealers in respect of goods sold at the time or before the delivery thereof. He therefore held that these charges properly formed part of the sale price











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