TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Interest under Section 27(1) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 - Held that:- The dealer had chosen to withhold full payment of turnover tax by obtaining an interim order merely because a lot of others had done so, as it had paid turnover tax, giving full particulars thereof for the previous years - The provisions regarding interest were statutory provisions and there being no order against the running of interest from the time of default, the dealer could not now claim that the demand for interest by the Department was illegal or unauthorized - Decided against the assessee - STR Nos. 12 of 2002 and 4 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 24-1-2011 - MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI MR. JUSTICE M.L.MEHTA JJ. Mr. H.N. Arora, Advocate For Petitioner Mr. Rajesh Mahna, Advocate. For Respondent Mr. Raj Batra, Advocate. For Petitioner Mr. Rajesh Mahna, Advocate. For Respondent M.L. MEHTA, J. 1. By this common judgment, we propose to dispose of both the references made by the Appellate Tribunal, Sales Tax Department, New Delhi. Initially ST Ref. No. 12 of 2002 was made on the following question of law:- Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case and on a true interpr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were nothing but plates within the ambit of this Clause. 5. To buttress his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon The Deuty Commissioner (C.T.) Coimbatore Divison v. The South India Traders 50 STC 106; Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue Taxes, Ernakulam v. Pio Food Packers 46 STC 63 (SC); Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Limited v. Union of India 1997(89) ELT 463(B); Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-II Commissionerate v. Tarpaulin International (2010) 34 VST 97 (SC) and K.A.C. Trading Corporation v. The State of Tamil Nadu (1984) 55 STC 62. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Department submitted that plates of the type specified in Clause (vii) of sub-section (iv) of Section 14 do not include the cable trays - perforated or ladder type. He relied upon various judgments such as Rajasthan Roller Flour Mills Association v. State of Rajasthan (1993) 91 STC 408 (SC); Jai Shakti Traders v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1995) 97 STC 114 (SC); Bengal Iron Corporation and Anr. v. Commercial Tax Officer and Ors. (1993) 90 STC 47 (SC); Agra Metal Peforators v. Commissioner, Sales Ta, U.P. Lucknow (1981) 48 STC 378; Hindu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arly. Therefore, commodities other than those specified cannot be introduced into the relevant provisions on the ground that they are derived from the primary commodities mentioned in section 14(i). The expression that is to say is employed in section 14(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, to make clear and fix the meaning of what is to be explained or defined. Such words are not used, as a rule, to amplify a meaning and in the context of single point sales tax, the expression is meant to exhaustively enumerate the kind of goods in a given list. 11. Similarly the Supreme Court in the case of Royal Hatcheries (P) Ltd. v. State of AP 1994 Supp (1) SCC 429 also held that the words to the effect that is to say qualify the word which precedes them. This indicates that these terms must therefore be understood in the context of the words which follow. 12. Relying upon the authorities noted in para (5) above, the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that bending and punching iron plates and making them cable trays does not amount to manufacture and the goods continued to be iron and steel plates. However, we note that the authorities relied upon by the learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fruit and the canned pineapple slices. The dealer and the consumer regard both as pineapple. The only difference is that the sliced pineapple is a presentation of fruit in a more convenient from and by reason of being canned it is capable of storage without spoiling. The additional sweetness in the canned pineapple arises from the sugar added as preservative. On a total impression, it seems to us, the pineapple slices must be held to possess the same identity as the original pineapple fruit. Referring to Anheuser-Bush Brqing Association v. United States, the Court said: Manufacture implies a change, but every change is not manufacture, and yet every change in an article is the result of treatment, labour and manipulation. But something more is necessary .. There must be transformation; a new and different article must emerge, having a distinctive name, character or use . And further: At some point processing and manufacturing will merge. But where commodity retains a continuing substantial identity through the processing stage we cannot say that it has been manufactured . 15. Similarly, the cases of Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co Ltd (supra) which related to cut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1956. Having been subjected to the process of manufacture by the applicant, they became a commercially different commodities, not enumerated in any of the sub-clauses of section 14(iv) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Therefore, they were not declared goods. 22. In the case of Bengal Ingot Co. Ltd Ors. (supra), it was held as under:- the steel casting were processed and machined at the applicant s factory with the result different articles of various shapes and sizes having different trade names came out and were sold in the market to meet various mechanical and engineering needs. The fact that no other metal or material was used in the process could not be the sole criterion to determine whether the commodities sold and marketed by the applicant in different trade names were still known in trade circles as a mere steel casting. 23. In view of the law as laid down in judicial pronouncements noted above, one of the tests would be as to whether the article produced is regarded in trade, by those who deal in it as distinct in identity from the commodity involved in its manufacture. Though the said article might have undergone a degree of processing, if it retains its origi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the above discussions, we answer the first question in favour of the Department and against the petitioner. 27. With regard to second question regarding liability, if any, of the petitioner to pay interest under Section 27(1) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 it may be stated that this Section provides that if any dealer fails to pay the tax due as required by sub-section (3) of section 21, he shall, in addition to the tax (including any penalty) due, be liable to pay simple interest on the amount so due at one per cent per month from the date immediately following the last date for the submission of the return under sub-section (2) of the said section for a period of one month and at one and a half per cent per month thereafter for so long as he continues to make default in such payment or till the date of completion of assessment under section 23, whichever is earlier. 28. In the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Commercial Taxes Officers, (1994) 94 STC 422 (SC) the Apex Court held as under:- The full amount of tax due and payable prior to the submission of the return is clearly relatable to the information furnished in the return. Undoubtedly, the information to be furni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of others had done so, as it had paid turnover tax, giving full particulars thereof for the previous years. When the writ petitions were finally disposed of by the High Court turnover tax became payable not from the date of disposal of the writ petitions but from the date it was payable under the statute. The verdict of the court upholding validity of the provisions relating to turnover tax was a mere declaration or reaffirmation of the liability that already existed and was created by the statute. The element of bona fide was absent. The dealer defaulted in making payment at its choice. The provisions regarding interest were statutory provisions and there being no order against the running of interest from the time of default, the dealer could not now claim that the demand for interest by the Department was illegal or unauthorized. 29. In the present case there is a finding of the fact by the Tribunal that the returns filed by the petitioner are not true and correct. In its order dated 17th August, 2001, the Tribunal observed as under:- The provisions of section 14 (iv) of the CST Act are unambiguous and clear. Hence, it cannot be said that the returns filed by the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
