Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.22 seconds)
Arulmigu Ramanathaswamy Devasthanam ... vs The Principal Commissioner And ... on 13 October, 1998 cites

State Of Tamil Nadu vs Shakti Estates & Anr on 1 February, 1989

In State of Tamil Nadu v. Shakti Estates , in the case Coming under Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the learned Lordships considered what is meant by business. In that case Assessee acquired some forest land for the purpose of raising Coffee and Cardamom plantation. For that purpose, they have to clear a portion of the forest and in the process fell the unwanted trees standing thereon as natural growth. The cut trees were sold by the assessee in the form of firewood as well as in the form of out sizes of timber as well as sleepers. The question that arose for consideration was whether the sale of cut sizes of timber and sleepers amount to be a business and taxed. Their Lordships in para 8 of the judgment held thus, They (assessees) took steps to exploit them in a commercial manner. When the trees yielded timber, the assessee not only had them sawn and cut to sizes but even converted them into sleepers and sold them. They reduced a part of the jungle growth to charcoal and sold the same. Taken all together, one is left in no doubt that when the assessees went in for a purchase or lease of the forest for starting a plantation they also knowingly let themselves in for engaging in a trade in the forest produce. The fact that the assessees are business entities, the size of the tract developed, the extent and value of the trees standing on the land, the inevitability of the jungles having to be cleared and the standing trees disposed of before commercial crops could be grown, the manner in which the forest trees were disposed of are all, we think, insignia that mark out the entire set of activities as a concern in the nature of trade.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 9 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Member Board Of Revenue, West Bengal vs Controller Of Stores Eastern Railway ... on 28 April, 1989

In the next case reported in Member Board of Revenue W.B. v. Controller of Stores, Eastern Rly. A.I.R. 1989 S.C. 1468, the Railways as common carried sold some unclaimed goods. The question was whether that is liable for Sales Tax. In para 6 of the judgment, their Lordships held, ...It is an activity which may be regarded as necessarily incidental or ancillary to its business as carrier of the goods. It seems to us that the assessee South Eastern Railway was a 'dealer' for the purposes of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941." and therefore held it is a business activity.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 22 - R S Pathak - Full Document
1