9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as, "the CST Act") with the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit C, Guwahati. The petitioner deals in life saving drugs and makes supply to the distributors located in different north eastern States. This case pertains to the assessment year 2000-01, for which exemption benefits were given to the assessee by accepting the C forms submitted by the assessee furnished by the registered dealers to whom supplies were made and the assessment was completed on June 5, 2002. The impugned proceeding was initiated through a show-cause notice dated January 1, 2003 issued by the Superintendent of Taxes in purported exercises of powers under section 18(1) of the AGST Act read with section 9(2) of the CST Act, whereby the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... incipal dealer of another State are valid and accordingly the tax exemption sought on the basis of those three C forms, should not have been disallowed in the reassessment exercise. As regards the discrepancy in the C form of M/s. Das Medical in which the registration number of the purchasing dealer was not mentioned, Mr. Agarwal points out that subsequently a certificate was issued by the Superintendent of Taxes mentioning the registration number of M/s. Das Medical. On the defect in the G form furnished by M/s. Hills Medical, Aizawl, which was pre-dated, the petitioner contends that subsequently fresh C form was obtained to replace the defective C form. For the 6th C form, mentioned in the show-cause, notice, which was considered defectiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions were considered as sale to unregistered dealers and were made assessable to tax. Mr. Agarwal, in order to show justification for court's intervention with the reassessment has relied upon the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax, M. P. v. Badri Lal Hanumanprasad reported in [1979] 44 STC 479 (MP). In this case the C form accepted at the time of assessment was found to be without any date and noticing this defect, the Commissioner of Sales Tax exercised suo motu revision and held that the authority was wrong in accepting the defective C form. The Board of Revenue on appeal held that the assessee should be given an opportunity to rectify the defect and accordingly remanded the case back to the Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts in the case of Tirukoilur Oil Mills Ltd. [1967] 20 STC 388 (Mad) show that the Madras High Court was considering a case where the assessing officer did not consider the corrected C forms although they were tendered before assessment was completed. But the assessee in the present case despite receipt of the show-cause notice failed to take any steps to cure the defects in the six C forms until the reassessment proceeding was finalized. Their belated response after five months of the show-cause notice was limited to an assurance to the assessing authority that fresh C form will be furnished within 30 days. But the petitioner never furnished the corrected C forms and clarification given by the Commissioner of Taxes, Nagaland on July 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
