Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (10) TMI 46

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called as the State Act). First appeal against the said order was dismissed vide order dated 9.3.1992 (Annexure P-4). Second appeal was also dismissed vide order dated 30.12.1992 (Annexure P-5). 2. The petitioner-company located at Ludhiana (Punjab), at the relevant time, was engaged in business of sale and purchase of machinery and its parts. It was registered as a dealer under the State Act as also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter called as the Central Act). 3. For understanding nature of dispute between the parties, it would be appropriate to take stock of the facts which are narrated as under: 4. The petitioner had placed an order with M/s The Mysore Kirloskar Limited, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct. 6. When nothing happened, the petitioner again approached respondent No.2 vide communication of 27.2.1990 (Annexure P-2A) requesting him to release the truck as loss was being incurred due to detention of the machine (in the truck). Ultimately, the goods were released on 3.3.1990 against surety of Rs. 64,000/- furnished by the petitioner. 7. On 15.3.1990 when the case was fixed for hearing, the petitioner failed to turn up and rather sent a written request seeking time for producing consignee copy of G.R. from the Transport Corporation of India but the request was rejected and the petitioner was proceeded against ex parte on 15.3.1990. A penalty of Rs. 64,000/- was imposed vide order dated 15.3.1990 (Annexure P-3). Even two consecutiv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ration of India and despite having sought adjournments on this score did not produce the same. Asserting validity and legality of the impugned orders, prayer for dismissal of the petition was made. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties while perusing the paper book. 11. From the perusal of the documents on paper book, following points emerge out: (i) Machine was booked by Harihar party for Rajpura on 29.1.1989 through M/s Transport Corporation of India Limited; and, (ii) The gate pass issued by Harihar party was meant for M/s Steel Strips Wheels Limited, Somalheri, (Rajpura). 12. It is found that only one document out of all is carrying name of the petitioner. 13. To make it a case of inter-State sale, it is necessary to e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arty was the propelling force. It was well within knowledge of Harihar party as also the petitioner. Not only were the documents in favour of Rajpura party but even the delivery was made to the Rajpura party. Entire dispute is based on facts about which there is no confusion. The petitioner has remained unsuccessful in setting out a case of it being a sale in transit from the documents. Imposition of penalty vide assessment order (Annexure P-3) affirmation of which was made in appellate order (Annexure P-4) and second appellate order (Annexure P-5) moreover, is not based on any finding that subsequent sale was separate and was intra-State or inter-State sale. 18. Placing reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in M/s Brij Bas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ad played hide and seek with the Assessing Officer. 20. So far as powers of the officer regarding Sales Tax Check Barrier, Lalru are concerned, it is clear that he had nowhere gone into the question of adjudication as to whether the transaction amounted to inter-State or intra-State sale but remaining within his domain, had applied provisions of Section 14-B of the State Act as he had found that not only the petitioner was intentionally adopting delaying tactics but had also produced documents with contradictory entries raising a suspicion about genuineness of documents about which a show cause notice had then been given to the petitioner. Defects found in the documents were pointed out which are as under: (i) Gate Pass is dated 4.1.90. I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates