9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 871X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cit court fee and registry upon payment of deficit of court fee to assign the number. 3. The appeals are on the premise that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes while exercising suo motu revisional powers has committed an error and illegality in reversing the order passed by the Appellate Commissioner and in restoring the assessment order. 4. The question that arose was as to whether the appellant-dealer who without any dispute had the benefit of exemption in respect of its sales turnover including inter-State sales turnover in terms of certain concessions given to new industrial establishments as per the Industrial Policy, 1996 to 2001, could claim the benefit of the effectuating notification of this policy as per Government Order dated November 15, 1996 in respect of its inter-State sales and in situations wherein exemption was claimed without the backup of production of C form and D form as the case may be. 5. The controversy arose in the background of the amendments to the provisions of sub-section (5) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short "the CST Act") in terms of the amending Act No. 20 of 2002 given effect to from May 11, 2002. 6. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State who have made submissions in some detail. 12. The main contention of Sri T.N. Keshavamurthy, learned counsel for the appellant, is that the kind of benefit given to an entrepreneur who has set up a new industrial unit in terms of the notification of the year 1996 is in the nature of rebate or concession given; that it is not actually in the nature of exemption, the tax liability is determined and in fact in the present case due to non-production of C and D forms, the dealer has already been assessed to tax at the regular rates without giving the concessional rates as is available under section 8(1) of the CST Act, but nevertheless even the rebate/concession is being denied which definitely is not the intention or object of the amendment or the notification; that the assessee-dealer is entitled to claim set-off as against the eligible amount and it matters little as to whether the rate of tax is as indicated in section 8(1) or section 8(2) of the CST Act and also as to whether the assessee has produced C and D forms or not for claiming such concession. 13. In support of such submission, Mr. T.N. Keshavamurthy, lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Court in the case of Venkatesh Surgical Cotton v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2013] 57 VST 470 (MP) Reported as Jaiprakash Associates Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2013] 57 VST 470 (MP). rendered on February 7, 2012 in W.P. No. 11427 of 2008 and connected matters, supports the submissions and the notification dated May 31, 2002 virtually ensures that an assessee cannot claim any exemption without the production of C form or D form. 18. It is also submitted that the argument of rebate or concession is not available; that it is nothing but an exemption given referable to section 8(5) of the CST Act; that while there can be a dichotomy of nature of exemption granted under section 8A of the KST Act as the very notification grants exemption in respect of both sales tax turnover as well as Central sales tax turnover, in the sales tax enactment there is general exemption granted under section 8A and specific exemption granted under section 19C of the KST Act, but such dichotomy or discretion is not available in the CST Act and section 8(5) of the CST Act being the only statutory provision available for granting exemption and with section 8(5) of the CST Act now being amended and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. Section 8 of the CST Act reads as under: "8. Rates of tax on sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce.-(1) Every dealer, who in the course of inter-State trade or whom the goods are sold containing the prescribed particulars in a prescribed form obtained from the prescribed authority: Provided that the declaration is furnished within the prescribed time or within such further time as that authority may, for sufficient cause, permit. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the State Government may on the fulfilment of the requirements laid down in sub-section (4) by the dealer if it is satisfied that it is necessary so to do in the public interest, by notification in the Official Gazette, and subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, direct,- (a) that no tax under this Act shall be payable by any dealer having his place of business in the State in respect of the sales by him, in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, to a registered dealer from any such place of business of any such goods or classes of goods as may be specified in the notification, or that the tax on such sales shall be calculated at such lower rates than those ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . We notice from the scheme of this section that that section not only is charging section, but also provides the rate of tax vis-a-vis in respect of which sale has been effected by a dealer to purchaser outside the State. 26. Sub-section (1) of section 8 of the CST Act takes care of inter-State sales effected by registered dealer in favour of registered dealers or Governments. The rate of tax one can notice is on a lower side and not more than four per cent during the relevant time and now it is two per cent. 27. Sub-section (2) of section 8 of the CST Act covers other situations of inter-State sale of goods, i.e., sales not in favour of registered dealers and Governments. Here again, the case being declared goods or otherwise have a bearing on the rate of tax. 28. Sub-section (4) of section 8 of the CST Act controls the operation of sub-section (1) of section 8 of the CST Act by indicating that the fact of inter-State sales being in favour of either registered dealer or Government, should be evidenced by the purchaser providing a statutory form known as C form in the case of registered dealer and D form if the sale is in favour of the Government. 29. Sub-section (5) of sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and other Governments. 33. We are of the view that this is the only proper way of understanding of the amendment as we find that sub-section (5) of section 8 of the CST Act is an enabling provision to grant exemptions in situations where it is a case of levy of tax under the CST Act. 34. We are not inclined to accept the contentions urged on behalf of the State to read the changes brought about by the amending Act of 2002 as one which governs both clauses (a) and (b) for the reason that insofar as clause (a) is concerned, we notice that the sales are all in favour of registered dealer and the Government in clause (b) pertains to inter-State sales in favour of other persons other than registered dealers and Governments are also covered. It is therefore we have to attribute a meaning to the Legislature having made a conscious distinction between the clauses (a) and (b) of section 8(5) of the CST Act from which what we can understand is that restriction imposed will have a bearing and proper meaning if it is only with reference to inter-State sales effected in favour of registered dealers and the Governments. 35. We have perused the judgment of the Allahabad High Court and with re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes exercising his suo motu revisional powers under section 22A of the KST Act. 42. The assessment period involved in these appeals are 2003-04 and 2004-05. Only one number having been assigned, we direct the assessee to pay deficit court-fee and registry upon payment of deficit of court fee to assign the number. 43. These appeals are allowed in terms of the judgment rendered above in STA No. 17 of 2010. RE: STRP Nos. 134 and 137 and 138 of 2008: 44. These revision petitions by the State Government under section 20(3) of the KST Act are directed against the order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and raising the question as to the entitlement or otherwise of the benefit of exemption under the notification of the year 1996 as a dealer who has set up a new industry in the notified areas and who has effected inter-State sales and has claimed benefit/exemption, but denied because of non-declaration in C forms by registered dealer. 45. Identical questions having been examined in the above appeals and the questions having already been answered in the above appeals, we opine that the revision petitions are to be d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
