9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were passed, firstly, by the Commercial Tax Officer, Lyons Range, 14 Beliaghata Main Road, Calcutta-15 being the respondent No.1, secondly by the Assistant Commercial Taxes, Chowringhee Circle on September 22, 1988 and lastly by the Appellate and the Revisional Board being respondent No.1 on June 5, 1997 and, prayed for withdrawal and/or cancellation of the demand made in form 4. Ordinarily, in these types of matter in which three quasi-judicial authorities have screened the petitioner's grievance and claim, the writ court does not interfere, however, when the rule was issued by the Court, I am duty-bound to examine firstly as to legality and validity in the eye of law of the aforesaid three impugned orders and secondly, the demand made by the respondents. Without narration of the short fact in this case it would be inappropriate to decide this matter. 2.. The same are as stated hereinafter. The petitioner being the dealer, seller and exporter of chemical goods purchased certain chemical items from an Andhra Pradesh dealer on May 9, 1981. At the time of purchase of the said materials, the petitioner duly furnished necessary declaration in form C and also paid 4 per cent central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as amended from time to time lastly made by G.S.R. 56 (E) Notification F. No. 28/30/72-ST II dated February 9, 1973 with effect from April 1, 1973. In substance it is held that the petitioner did not obtain the certificate in form E-I either in prescribed form or manner. 5.. The appellate authority did not allow logically the benefit under section 8(1)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 although the petitioner furnished necessary Central declaration in form C. The revising authority however, did give no detail reasons for rejecting the petitioner's application but observed in cryptic manner that as there was a defect in E-I form and rectification had not been made, so the petitioner's claim was rejected. 6.. Mr. Gopal Chakraborty, learned Senior Advocate, contends that the decisions of all the three authorities are not sustainable under the law in as much as under the provision of section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 the petitioner is entitled to exemption from taxation as his client substantially complied with the requirements under the law by furnishing E-I form issued by the A.P. Government earlier and also produced C form issued by the Indian Oil Corporation, Ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds which, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 5, is a sale in the course of export of those goods out of the territory of India. (1-A) A dealer shall be liable to pay tax under this Act on a sale of any goods effected by him in the course of inter-State trade or commerce notwithstanding that no tax would have been leviable (whether on the seller or the purchaser) under the sales tax law of the appropriate State if that sale had taken place inside that State. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or subsection (1-A), where a sale of any goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce has either occasioned the movement of such goods from one State to another or has been effected by a transfer of documents of title to such goods during their movement from one State to another, any subsequent sale during such movement effected by a transfer of documents of title to such goods,- (A) to the Government, or (B) to a registered dealer other than the Government, if the goods are of the description referred to in sub-section (3) of section 8, shall be exempt from tax under this Act: Provided that no such subsequent sale shall be exempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dealer, a certificate referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (4) of section 8 is necessary. The prescribed authority and prescribed manner means as prescribed in the Rule. Rule 6 of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 prescribes forms E-I and E-II for furnishing the certificate as above. In other words in order to get exemption the dealer has to satisfy basically (i) purchase from registered dealer in another State of the goods the description of which are referred to in sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Act and subsequent sale of the same goods either to the Government or registered dealer. Both the transactions have to be proved by the methods mentioned in sub-section (2) of section 6 of the said Act. However, proof of subsequent sale can be established aliunde production, declaration and certificate as referred in sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of clause (b) of first proviso to sub-section (2) of section 6 of the said Act. 11.. Of course, such proof will be to the satisfaction of the prescribed authority. This satisfaction is obviously subjective one but that does not mean rejection of proof will be unreasonable. If upon analysis of the facts and circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... form by three sales tax officials holding the same are not in statutory form and subsequent legalisation by the Government Officials does not remove the defect as the transaction relates to the year beyond 1981 whereas, legalisation has been done in 1985. 16.. I find there is considerable force in the submission of Mr. Chakraborty that the whole object of the statute is to establish the second sale. The aforesaid circumstances and the document being a non-statutory E-I form proves beyond reasonable doubt that the first sales took place from the Andhra Pradesh dealer to the petitioner. In this case there is no question of retrospective application of amended provision of Rule as when assessment was made non-statutory form was made statutory. 17.. I am of the view that the sales tax authorities have misconstrued the aforesaid sub-section (2) of the Act and they have arbitrarily rejected the proof adduced by the petitioner. Issuance of the non-statutory form with due counter-signature of the appropriate officials and subsequent legalisation by the appropriate order of the Government establishes beyond doubt that the documents are acceptable as a proof of purchase from the Andhra de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
