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 (5) TMI 781

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l and is running a flour mill. During the assessment year 1999-2000, the respondent deposited tax as prescribed under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 at the rate of four per cent and the same was deposited in the Government treasury account. However, the petitioner passed an order by accepting the rate of tax at the rate of four per cent but levied surcharge on the said tax amounting to Rs. 29,268 and interest thereon. It is the claim of the respondent that there was no proper showcause notice or claim of the petitioner about levy of the additional surcharge. This was levied in violation of principles of natural justice which was not proper on the part of the assessing officer. It was further pleaded that under the provisions of the Act, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... officer was justified in levying the additional tax and interest thereon and claim be reversed. 5. I have gone through the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner-Department and have gone through the impugned orders. In my view, both, the Tax Board as also the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), are justified in coming to the correct conclusion. The assessee had deposited the due tax in accordance with notification dated March 7, 1994 bearing No. 929, F.4(8)FD/Gr.-4/94-71 wherein in the case of asseessee and similarly situated dealers tax rate of four per cent, was prescribed. It is also stated in the said notification that even there is no requirement of filing of form C when the sale is outside the State of Rajasthan. Bo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pages 439 and 440 in 64 STC): "In our opinion, all that section 8(2A) provides is that the tax payable under the Central Sales Tax Act, will be, at the rate levied for the sale or purchase of the identical goods under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, subject to other conditions specified therein. In other words, the levy of tax under the Central Act will follow the levy of tax on the sale or purchase of the goods under the State law. The Act, by which the tax is levied, for the sale or purchase of the goods, under the State law, on the specified commodity, alone is relevant or should be looked into. This seems to be the plain meaning of the words used in section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The eye need look no further. S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Central Sales Tax Act." 8. This judgment was affirmed by the honourable apex court in Janatha Expeller's case [1992] 85 STC 105 (SC). 9. The honourable Madras High Court in Sree Ayyanar Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1998] 109 STC 205 (Mad), exactly on identical issue held as under: "Allowing the petition, that from the language employed in the notification, it was clear that that there were no areas of limitation therein, so as to restrict the operation of the notification, with reference to sub-section (1) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act. The words or the expressions employed in clause (ii) of the said notification, were 'the tax payable under the said Act' shall be calculated at t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t, in respect of the goods, to which a notification had been framed under sub-section (5) of section 8 of the Act. The order of the Tribunal, adding the rate of levy of two per cent, by way of additional sales tax to the lower rate of levy at two per cent imposed, pursuant to the notification issued by the State Government, under sub-section (5) of section 8 of the Act was not sustainable in law." 10. Thus, in the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the judgments of the honourable Supreme Court and other courts, there was no occasion of levying additional tax as it could not have exceeded the rate prescribed at the rate of four per cent under section 8(1) of the Act. It is also clear on perusal of the assessment orde .....

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