Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2018 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 157 - TRIPURA HIGH COURTPenalty under Section 10(b) read with Section 10-A of the CST Act - mis-use of C-Form - presence of mens rea - Whether the petitioners have falsely represented while using the C-form against the said purchase of the JCB excavators? - Held that:- In proceedings for levy of penalty under Section 10-A of the CST Act, the burden would be on the Revenue to prove the existence of circumstances constituting the said offence - In the light of the language employed in Section 10-A and the nature of penalty contemplated therein, it cannot be held that all types of omissions or commissions in the use of Form C will be embraced by the expression “false representation.” - a finding of mens rea is a condition precedent for levying penalty under Section 10(b) read with Section 10-A of the CST Act - penalty not warranted. Whether the order passed by the respondent No.4 is a simple order of penalty or the assessment in terms of Section 31 of the TVAT Act or is it a composite assessment of the tax and penalty being in the nature of assessment and whether in the circumstances, the limitation for 5(five) years would apply? - Held that:- In the manner in which the assessment has been made it clearly appears to have been made under Section 31 of the TVAT Act and as such the limitation under Section 33 of the TVAT Act would apply. Therefore, the impugned notice dated 07.05.2014 and the order are without jurisdiction being barred by limitation under Section 33 of the TVAT Act. But the said bar is not applicable so far the impugned notice - if the jurisdiction under Section 10(a) is exercised by the authority on conforming to the conditions laid down therein, the limitation as prescribed by Section 33 of the TVAT Act will have no manner of application in such cases. Whether the petitioner is liable to pay further tax as the situs of sale falls within the jurisdiction of the State of Haryana? - Held that:- The purchase took place at Haryana and ‘C’ form has been used to get the benefit of reduced rate of tax under Section 8(1) of the CST Act. The word ‘resell’ or the provisions as appearing in Section 8(3)(b) if read jointly, the word ‘resell’ would take an expansive meaning. Thus, when there can be two interpretations viz. (i) the strict interpretation of ‘resell’ and (ii) the expansive interpretation of ‘resell’, the benefit must go to the dealer - no further tax is required to be paid. The impugned orders are not sustainable in law - petition allowed.
|