TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... December 18, 1973, by the Commercial Tax Officer. An appeal therefrom was preferred before the appropriate Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, read with section 20(1) of the 1941 Act. The appeal was decided by an order dated July 4, 1978, by sending back the matter on remand to the Commercial Tax Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given in the said appellate order. Then, there was a fresh assessment on July 3, 1982, and a consequential notice of demand was issued on the same date. The prayers in the instant application are for setting aside (a) the said appellate order dated July 4, 1978, (b) the fresh assessment order dated July 3, 1982 and (c) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nature that it has no jurisdiction to entertain for disposal, applications relating to levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of a tax exclusively under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. He particularly referred to an order of this Tribunal passed in the case of Overseas Packaging Industries (P.) Ltd. reported in [1990] 78 STC 267. 4.. The ending words of sub-section (2A) of section 9 of the 1956 Act, to which Mr. Roy Chowdhury particularly referred, do not support the contention on behalf of the applicants that this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain for disposal, an application of the instant nature. The words 'as if' used in the relevant portion of section 9(2A) of the 1956 Act, are sufficiently indicative of the fact that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugh the agency of the State Government. The liability to pay such dues remains as a liability payable to the Central Government. The character of the tax continues to remain the same. A similar view was taken in the case of Sitaram Sree Gopal v. Certificate Officer [1977] 40 STC 124 (Cal). In another case reported in [1981] 48 STC 121 (Bom) (Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Barium Chemicals Ltd.), the Bombay High Court also took the view that the tax levied and collected under the 1956 Act is so done by the Central Government through the State Government as its agent. In our view, the provisions of section 9(2) and 9(2A) of the 1956 Act do not convert the tax levied and collected under the 1956 Act to a tax under the State sales tax law, even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with effect from the date appointed by the State Government by notification in this behalf this Tribunal would exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority in relation to matters of adjudication or trial of any disputes, complaints or offences with respect to levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of any tax under any specified State Act and all matters connected therewith or incidental thereto; and no court except the Supreme Court of India shall with effect from such date exercise any jurisdiction, powers or authority with respect to the aforesaid matters. The expression "specified State Act" has been defined in section 2(k) of the 1987 Act as a State Act specified in the Schedule to this Act. It may be noted that the Central Sales ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1987 Act. Therefore, in our view, if a matter connected with or incidental to a tax under the 1941 Act attracts the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, only in such a case and to that extent, this Tribunal will be competent to exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority in relation to the 1956 Act, but not otherwise. As an illustration, a deduction claimed under section 5(2)(a)(v) of the 1941 Act will require consideration of certain provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. This Tribunal will be competent to consider that question as it is connected with or incidental to a tax under the 1941 Act. We have already seen that a tax under the 1956 Act is not a tax under the 1941 Act, nor could it be. (See entry 92A of List I and entry 54 of List ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment without having an opportunity to go through the judgment with reasons. It appears that the Division Bench of the High Court held that the said matter No. 224 of 1977 (which is completely separate from the present application) being a reference under section 21 of the 1941 Act should be transferred to this Tribunal for disposal. Therefore, on the basis of what appears from the aforesaid minutes in the said matter No. 224 of 1977, that case seems to be clearly distinguishable on facts from the present application. 9.. From the above discussion it transpires that the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, does not confer jurisdiction, powers and authority on this Tribunal on matters relating to a tax under the Central Sales Tax A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
