Commissioner, Sales Tax vs Vijay Kumar Krishna Kumar on 19 January, 1967
The Andhra Pradesh case on which strongest reliance was placed only needs to be considered. In that case it was found as a fact that the assessee-society maintained two sets of accounts, one a regular account and the other a clandestine account, and it used to sell jaggery in the open auction at higher prices than those fixed under the Food Control Order. In the peculiar facts found in that case it was held that the society was a dealer and the transactions were sales within the meaning of the Act. In that case the facts found were that the assessee recorded transactions carried on by it as a commission agent as if it purchased goods from sellers and sold them as its own goods to buyers, paid sellers the price of the goods and received from the buyers their price. Selling of goods was not simultaneous with receiving them. On these facts the Judge (Revisions) had held that they were dealers, and the only question was whether there was material to support that finding. The High Court held that the facts found could legally support the finding given by the authorities below that the assessee bought and then sold the goods and was not merely bringing buyers into contact with sellers and arranging transactions between them. For the reasons given above, the question referred is answered in the negative and against the department. The reference is answered accordingly. The department will pay the costs of this reference which we assess at Rs. 100. Counsel's fee is also assessed at Rs. 100.