9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (12) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eipt in proof of payment of the tax due." Put in a nutshell the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioners is that the above rules cannot be complied with and have become unworkable in the matter of purchase tax, because, according to sub-clause (vi) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (Punjab Act No. 46 of 1948), in arriving at the figure of taxable turnover the following deductions have to be made from a dealer's gross turnover of the period: "(vi) the purchase of goods which are sold not later than six months after the close of the year, to a registered dealer, or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, or in the course of export out of the territory of India." It is argued that as the above deductions cover the period of six months after the close of the year, it would not be possible for the dealer to file a return and deposit the tax in accordance with the impugned rules quarterly before the expiry of the above period of six months. The strict compliance with the said rules, it is contended, would have the effect of nullifying for the time being the benefit of deductions allowed by sub-clause (vi) of clause (a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trade or commerce. The cotton seeds got out of the ginned cotton are crushed in the mill and sometimes are sold in the market. The petitionercompany was required under rule 20 to submit returns in Forms S.T. VIII and S.T. VIII-A for the year 1963-64 for all the four quarters. The company furnished returns in Form S.T. VIII, but did not file returns in Form S.T. VIII-A which relates to purchase tax. Subsequently, when a show cause notice was issued by the Assessing Authority as to why action should not be taken for not filing the returns, the petitioner-company deposited Rs. 48,000 on 21st December, 1963, for the first two quarters of 1963-64, and for the subsequent two quarters, under directions of the Assessing Authority, the petitioner-company deposited Rs. 24,000 and Rs. 40,000, making in all a deposit of Rs. 1,12,000 as tax for returns in Form S.T. VIII-A. According to the petitioner, rules 20 and 25, according to which the returns in Form S.T. VIII-A have to be filed and tax deposited, are liable to be struck down. It may be stated that according to the allegations made in the petition, a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution was filed by the petitioner-company before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub-clause (vi) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Act in arriving at the figure of taxable turnover for any period, the following deductions have to be made from a dealer's gross turnover: "(vi) the purchase of goods which are sold not later than six months after the close of the year, to a registered dealer, or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, or in the course of export out of the territory of India: Provided that in the case of such a sale to a registered dealer, a declaration in the prescribed form and duly filled and signed by the registered dealer to whom the goods are sold, is furnished by the dealer claiming deduction." It is argued that as the above deductions cover the period of six months after the close of the year, it would not be possible for the dealer to file a return and deposit the tax in accordance with the impugned rules quarterly before the expiry of the above period of six months. Reference has also been made to Form S.T. VIII-A of the return of purchase tax which has to be filed by a dealer and according to which "taxable turnover" means purchase price paid for the goods minus deductions which are permitted by the law. Whateve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h), the rules may prescribe the returns to be furnished under sub-section (3) of section 10, and the dates by which, and the authority to which such returns should be furnished. A plain reading of rules 20 and 25 makes it clear that they fall within the scope of section 10 of the Act and the rule-making power given to the Government by section 27. So far as the contention is concerned that if the returns are filed quarterly along with treasury receipts about the deposit of the tax due, it would have the effect of nullifying the benefit of sub-clause (vi) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Act, I am of the view that this contention is devoid of force. The above sub-clause makes provision for the deductions to be made in arriving at the final figure of taxable turnover for certain sales during the period of six months after the close of the year. Those sales can certainly be taken into account and consequential deductions made at the time of the assessment under section 11 of the Act, but it is, in my opinion, not open to a dealer to evade the filing of the quarterly return for purchase tax on the ground that he would be entitled to some further deductions in respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Income-tax Act, 1922, and sections 208 and 209 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which make provisions for the payment of advance income-tax. It is an established principle of law that different provisions of an enactment should be so construed that they may operate in harmony with the other provisions of the Act. Applying this rule of construction, sub-clause (vi) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5 should be read in harmony with section 12 of the Act, and as section 12 makes provision for refund of tax in contingencies including those contemplated by sub-clause (vi) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5, it would follow that the above sub-clause (vi) does not prohibit the deposit of tax which may ultimately have to be refunded on account of deductions allowed by that sub-clause. I would, accordingly, hold that there is no repugnancy between the impugned rules 20 and 25, and the provisions of the Act. Reference has been made on behalf of the petitioners to Vidarbha Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer III, II Division, Nagpur and Others[1963] 14 S.T.C. 430., wherein it has been laid down that rules made under a statute cannot take away any part o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
