Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 2(46),3,7,33,34,47

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 2(46), 3, 7, 33, 34 & 47---Determination of tax liability---Supplies made under Consumers Promotion Scheme---Trade discount---Appeal to High Court---Appellant Corporation which was engaged in manufacturing and marketing of shaving blades, was supplying blades in packets containing 10 blades, but in the relevant year appellant supplied in special packing in which one blade was added extra in the packet and one packet containing 11 blades was sold at the price of 10 blades as discount under Consumers Promotion Scheme---Appellant was served with a show-cause notice by Authorities observing that appellant had made taxable supplies of shaving blades without payment of Sales Tax amounting to Rs.14,02,356 for relevant year leviable thereon---Claim of Department was that there was no provision in Sales Tax Act, 1990 to allow a registered person to give any discount in a 'quantitative form' in 'money terms'---Appellant was found to be liable not only for amount to Sales Tax, but also to additional tax under S.34 and a penalty under S.33 of Sales Tax Act, 1990---Validity---Extra blade was a taxable supply made by appellant in the course of taxable activity carried out by it---Selling of 11 blades for the price of 10, though amounted to discount as far the market practice of similar sales promotion schemes was concerned; but said discount was made in quantitative terms which was not countenanced by the definition of "value of supply"---Proviso to S.2(46)(d) of Sales Tax Act, 1990 had clearly stated the modes in which a discounted price had to be mentioned in the invoice---Invoices issued in the case did not show price of one blade which stood excluded from computation of "value of supply"---Department had not disputed offer of a discount in the form of making supply of more quantity at the price of lesser quantity, but such discount could be claimed and allowed only where value of quantity offered more than the normal supply was expressly indicated in the invoices as a "trade discount", but it was not shown in that manner---Claim of appellant could not be allowed in circumstances ORDER NASIM SIKANDAR, J.---In this further appeal under…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492