TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s original petitions were pending before this court challenging the levy of surcharge under the Surcharge Act on tax payable under section 7(14) of the KGST Act and this court had granted interim stay in those petitions, which were later decided against the assessees. Subsequently, assessment orders were passed in respect of the petitioner for the assessment year 1992-1993 in which surcharge of Rs. 3,255.20 was also demanded. The said assessment order is produced as exhibit P2. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with exhibit P3 revenue recovery notice demanding amounts of Rs. 22,661 and Rs. 6,118. According to the petitioner, the amount of Rs. 22,661 represents surcharge and the amount of Rs. 6,118 represents penal interest on the surcharge. The petitioner is challenging exhibit P3 notice to the extent it demands interest on the surcharge for delayed payment of surcharge and seeks the following reliefs: (i) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing exhibit P3 notice issued by the second respondent; or (ii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order, directing the second respondent to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchase of goods and taxes on profession, by the levy of a surcharge on such taxes. Section 3 of the Surcharge Act, which is the charging section in respect of surcharge on sales tax, reads as under: 3. Levy of surcharge on sales and purchase taxes. (1) The tax payable under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 shall, in the case of a dealer whose turnover, (a) is not less than one lakh rupees but does not exceed ten lakhs rupees in a year, be increased by a surcharge at the rate of five per centum, and (b) exceeds ten lakhs rupees in a year, be increased by a surcharge at the rate of ten per centum, of the tax payable for that year, and the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 shall apply in relation to the said surcharge as they apply in relation to the tax payable under the said Act: Provided that where in respect of declared goods as defined in clause (c) of section 2 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the tax payable by such dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 together with the surcharge payable under this sub-section exceeds four per centum of the sale or purchase price, the rate of surcharge in respect of such goods sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the responsibility of the officers under the KGST Act by resort to the procedure prescribed under that Act. Further section 9(2) of the Act does not make the entire provisions of the KGST Act applicable to Central Sales Tax Act. Section 9(2) reads as under: 9(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act and the Rules made thereunder, the authorities for the time being empowered to assess, reassess, collect and enforce payment of any tax under the general sales tax law of the appropriate State shall, on behalf of the Government of India, assess, reassess, collect and enforce payment of tax, including any penalty, payable by a dealer under this Act as if the tax or penalty payable by such a dealer under this Act is a tax or penalty payable under the general sales tax law of the State; and for this purpose they may exercise all or any of the powers they have under the general sales tax law of the State; and the provisions of such law, including provisions relating to returns, provisional assessment, advance payment of tax, registration of the transferee of any business, imposition of the tax liability of a person carrying on business on the transferee of, or successor to, such b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AIR 1938 PC 67 and Union of India v. A.L. Rallia Ram [1964] 3 SCR 164 at 185 to 190). Our attention was, however, drawn by Mr. Sen to two cases. Even in those cases, Commissioner of Income-tax v. M. Chandra Sekhar [1985] 151 ITR 433 (SC) and Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1986] 160 ITR 961 (SC), all that the court pointed out was that provision for charging interest was, it seems, introduced in order to compensate for the loss occasioned to the Revenue due to delay. But then interest was charged on the strength of a statutory provision, may be its objective was to compensate the Revenue for the delay in payment of tax. But regardless of the reason which impelled the Legislature to provide for charging interest, the court must give that meaning to it as it conveyed by the language used and the purpose to be achieved. Therefore, any provision made in a statute for charging or levying interest on delayed payment of tax must be construed as a substantive law and not adjectival law. So construed and applying the normal rule of interpretation of statutes, we find, as pointed out by us earlier and by Bhagwati, J., in the Associated Cement Compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
