1 SB Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 16/2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 16/2002 Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward-I, Sikar Versus Duzodwala Cement(P) Ltd., Sikar. Date: 19.10.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain,J. Mr. A. Kaushik on behalf of Mr. R.B. Mathur, for the petitioner. BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one is present on behalf of the respondent despite of service of notice of this petition. 2. The question involved in the present case is, “Whether packing material sold alongwith cement is subject to sales tax or not?” 3. The sale of bags, which were sold alongwith cement, were separated by the assessing officer and tax was levied on the sale of bags i.e. packing material and penalty was also levied. Being aggrieved with the same the asessee challenged the action of the assessing officer before Appellate Authority. Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) vide its order dated 21.10.1997 set aside the assessment order. The Revenue challenged the order passed by the 2 SB Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 16/2002 Appellate Authority before Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer(hereinafter referred as 'the Tax Board'), but the same was also dismissed by the Tax Board vide order dated 19.07.2001, which has been impugned by the Revenue in this revision petition before this Court. 4. It is relevant to mention that appellate authority i.e. Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) as well as the Tax Board both have observed that department has failed to prove separate sale of bags, i.e. packing material, wherein cement was filled in, therefore, no tax is leviable on the packing material. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner/Revenue fairly and frankly conceded that the issue involved in the present revision petition has been decided against the Revenue by this Court in Udaipur Distillery Company Limited Vs. Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal & Others, reported in [2003] 132 STC 489(Raj.) and also by the Hon'ble Apex Court in ACTO Vs. M/s. M.B. & Co., reported in 2002 volume 28 Tax World 494 and present case is fully covered by aforesaid decisions. 6. This Court in Udaipur Distillery Company Limited(supra) considered the composite sale of Beer and Indian-made Foreign Liquor in bottles and held that there can be no presumption of 3 SB Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 16/2002 sale of bottles separately. 7. Similarly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in ACTO case(supra) considered the fact that assessing officer completed the assessment holding that only granite tiles sold are exempted under the Incentive Scheme and not the packing material. Assessing officer, accordingly, levied tax on sale of packing material treating it as an implied sale, however, the assessment order was set aside by Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) as well as by Tax Board. Revision petition filed by Revenue was dismissed by Rajasthan High Court. Hon'ble Apex Court affirmed the orders passed by Deputy Commissioner(Appeals), Tax Board and High Court and held that packing material is not exigible to tax. 8. In view of above discussions, it is clear that issue or legal question involved in the present revision petition has already been decided by this Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases referred above and present case is fully covered by aforesaid decisions. Therefore, there is no merit in this revision petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain),J. Manoj, Item No.2.