TMI Blog1977 (2) TMI 118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,061 even though the applicants satisfied that the buyer is a recognised dealer and has issued the required certificate in form 15 and that the goods purchased by him were specified in his recognition certificate?" The relevant facts giving rise to this question are as follows: The applicants are registered dealers and are running a printing press. They supplied packing labels to Parle Products Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Parle Products") against certificate in form 15. Parle Products are also registered dealers and had obtained a recognition certificate as provided under section 25 of the said Act, as it stood at the relevant time, in which one of the items specified in the list appended was packing labels. The Assistant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hedule C the fact that they were mentioned in the recognition certificate would not entitle the purchasing dealer to issue a certificate in respect of such goods, which were clearly prohibited from being purchased on the strength of the recognition certificate. It may be mentioned that the Tribunal held that the said articles were covered by entry 6 of Schedule C to the said Act, as it stood at the relevant time. It is the correctness of this decision of the Tribunal which is sought to be tested by way of the questions raised before us. We propose to consider first the second question which has been set out earlier. Under the provisions of section 12 of the said Act, as it stood at the relevant time, to obtain a deduction from the turnove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and manufacturers and held a recognition certificate under section 25 of the said Act, as we have already pointed out. One of the items mentioned in the list appended to the recognition certificate of the Parle Products was packing labels, and the Parle Products had issued a certificate as required by section 12 to the applicants in respect of the sales of the aforesaid articles by the applicants to the Parle Products. What we have to consider is whether in these circumstances, it was at all open to the Sales Tax Officer assessing the applicants to go into the question as to whether the item of packing labels had been correctly mentioned in the recognition certificate of the Parle Products. In connection with the above question, we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ler and that satisfaction is open to challenge in an appropriate proceeding before the High Court and even before the Supreme Court. It was held that the correctness or propriety of satisfaction of the notified authority in issuing the certificate in form B that the goods are likely to be required for the purpose of the business would not however be again open to challenge before another taxing authority in proceedings for assessment of tax. If, therefore, goods are specified in the certificate of registration in form B, it is not open, when a claim is made in respect of the purchase of those goods for the application of concessional rate of tax, to the Sales Tax Officer to deny to the selling dealer of those goods the benefit on the ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion certificate, the grant of this certificate implies a finding by the Commissioner or such authority as aforesaid that the goods listed are goods in respect of which recognition can be granted. This could be as a result of a quasi-judicial enquiry. In the present case, the Sales Tax Officer, to whom the powers in this regard were delegated, had initially issued a certificate of recognition to the Parle Products in which the item of packing labels was included in the list appended. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax commenced proceedings for suo motu revision and in those proceedings the said item has been retained after hearing the Parle Products, while some other items were directed to be deleted. If it was felt that the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Sales Tax here had no authority or jurisdiction to grant recognition regarding the packing labels, because the same were covered under entry 6 of Schedule C of the said Act. In our opinion, this contention is not well-founded. It is true that no recognition can be granted in respect of the aforesaid items mentioned in section 25 of the said Act. It is, however, for the Commissioner or the officer to whom the power is delegated in that behalf, to decide whether an item regarding which recognition is sought falls within those excluded categories or not. Once that determination is made it is not open to an assessing Sales Tax Officer to question the correctness of the same. It was next urged by Mr. Sanghvi that even if the recognit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
