Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(a) supply of water to visiting vessels;
(b) banking of visiting vessels with liquid fuel;
(c) offering of tender document for a consideration to prospective contractors;
(d) supply of water and issue of stores to accepted contractors;
(e) supply of water and issue of stores to its own engineers and staff; and
(f) disposal of unserviceable material or surplus material by auction or by inviting tenders.

It is the contention for the petitioner in each of these writ petitions that it is not a dealer and that, under the scheme of the Act, since sales-tax can be assessed only in respect of turnover of a dealer, the proceedings of the sales-tax authorities should be quashed and set aside. On the other hand, the contention of the Revenue in the counter-affidavit is that each of these writ petitions should be dismissed in limine. In the common counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the respondent in each of these writ petitions, it is contended that the question whether a transaction amounts to a sale taxable under the Act, or not is a question of fact to be decided by the Sales-tax authorities and cannot be agitated in a writ petition. It is contended by the deponent of the common counter-affidavit, Mr. A. Lokendar Reddy, Commercial Tax Officer, Company Circle, Visakhapatnam, that the assessment for the year 1969-70 was over and that an appeal is pending before the Assistant Commissioner. For the assessment years 1970-71 to 1974-75, only show-cause notice were issued. Before issuing the notice, the deponent as well as the Commercial Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam, who completed the assessment for 1969-70, had personally contacted the petitioners several times and requested them to produce their books for verification. The petitioners had neither furnished any information nor given any co-operation for verification of their accounts and therefore the Department had to proceed with such materials as they could get including the Administration Report and the Annual Accounts published by the petitioners. It is contended by the dependant of the counter affidavit that the question whether the transactions in a particular case are sales within the meaning of the Sales-tax Act is mixed question of fact and law and that the High Court should not get into the questions of fact particularly when law prescribes a procedure for ascertaining those facts. As regards each of these commodities for which the petitioner is assessed or is proposed to be assessed, the deponent of the counter-affidavit contends that it should be decided upon by the sales-tax machinery alone.

9. As we have pointed out, earlier the different materials in respect of which the Board of Trustees is sought to be assessed to Sales-tax are supply of water to visiting vessels : bankering of visiting vessels with liquid fuel; offering of tender documents for a consideration to prospective contractors; supply of water and issue of stores to accepted contractors; supply of water and issue of stores to its own engineers and staff; and disposal of unserviceable material or surplus material by auction by inviting tenders. We wish to make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of any particular commodity,. But in order to examine the question whether the Board of Trustees is a dealer or nor, it is worthwhile to bear in mind that, in respect of supply of water to visiting vessels and bunkering of visiting vessels with liquid fuel the Board of Trustees is rendering service to the Board of Trustees is rendering service to the different vessels and such supply of water to visiting vessels and bunkering of visiting vessels with fuel is a statutory obligation on the Board of Trustees. The rates to be charged are prescribed by the Board subject to the over all supervision of the Central Government.

16. In view of these two decisions of the Supreme Court, it is obvious that it must first be found that a particular assessee under consideration is carrying on business and if the assessee is selling scrap materials, the items must have been acquired with the intention of carrying on business. In the instant case, it is not possible for us, in view of what has been discussed above, to held that the Board of Trustees is carrying on any business or is a dealer and, therefore, it is not possible for us to hold that the sale or surplus material or sale of scrap amounts to carrying on any business and hence the amounts realised by disposal of unserviceable or surplus material by auction will not be liable to Sales-tax.