News Update

US Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha ElectionsGST - Once Appellate Authority comes to the conclusion that SCN was issued by an officer who was not competent; reply was also considered by an incompetent authority and the Competent Authority had not applied its independent mind, Appellate Authority could not have assumed original jurisdiction and proceeded further with the matter: HC7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farI-T - Initial burden of proof rested on assessee to substantiate his claim of having incurred expenditure on improvement of property: ITATTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresI-T - Agricultural income can be treated by ITO as undisclosed income in absence of any substantial / corroborative material to prove same: ITATCanada arrests three persons in alleged killing of Sikh separatistI-T - Income from sale of property has to be classified & characterised only in manner of computation as per section 45(2): ITATCus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political events
 
Kerala General Sales Tax Act - sale by brand name holder or trade mark holder to be first sale for purpose of Sec 5(2): Supreme Court

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, APR 22, 2014: THE appellant is the registered brand owner of 'CRYPTM'. Pursuant to an agreement dated 01.04.1995 entered into between the appellant and the manufacturing company viz. M/s. Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturing company had license and right to use the appellant's name 'CRYPTM'.

The assessing authority had completed the assessments for the assessment years 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 and had levied sales tax under Section 5(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. This was upheld by all higher authorities including the High Court.

The assessee is in appeal before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court noted that in order to attract Section 5(2) of the Act, the following conditions are to be satisfied:

(i) Sale of manufactured goods other than tea;

(ii) Sale of the said goods is under a trade mark/brand name and;

(iii) The sale is by the brand name holder or the trade mark holder within the State.

If the above three conditions are satisfied, the sale by the brand name holder or the trade mark holder shall be the first sale for the purpose of the Act.

Supreme Court held,

"According to the appellant/assessee who is a branded name holder, M/s. Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd. has license and is permitted to use the branded name "CRYPTM". The licensee manufactures the goods, namely, confectioneries and effects supply of sale to the brand name holder. It is the brand name holder, who affects the sale of the confectioneries which are to be taxed as Item 39 of the First Schedule to the Act within the State. Therefore, it is the brand name holder, who has to pay tax under section 5(2) of the Act. If for any reason M/s. Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd. has paid the tax while affecting the supply of the manufactured commodity to the appellant/assessee, the appellant/assessee and M/s Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd. can approach the authorities for claiming the refund of the tax paid by them."

The Supreme Court did not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

(See 2014-TIOL-46-SC-CT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.