TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment caused by the first sale and must be effected by the transfer of documents of title to such goods to a registered dealer. It is not sufficient if the subsequent sale is effected by transfer of documents of title to such goods. It is also necessary that this second sale must be subsequent to the first sale and the subsequent sale must be during the movement of the goods under the first sale. It is true that no tax is payable in respect of these transactions under the Punjab Vat Act. However, the mis-declaration in respect of the consignment would invite the penalty under Section 51(7)(b) nevertheless. Section 51(7)(b) would come into operation, if it is found that there has been an attempt to avoid or evade the tax due “or likely to be due under this Act”. It is necessary to to remand the matter even to avoid the liability under section 51(7)(b) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 on the ground that in any event there was no intention to avoid or evade the tax. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - VATAP No. 28 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 30-5-2017 - MR. S.J. VAZIFDAR, AND MR. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, JJ. For The Appellants : Mr. Sudhir Mittal, Advocate For The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and the consignment were to be transported from Sangaria in Rajasthan to Machhiwara in Punjab. The appellants are located in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. The appellants, in turn, sold the consignment to M/s S.T. Cottex Exports Pvt. Ltd. on the terms and conditions contained in an invoice also dated 05.12.2013. The invoice states that the sale was an E-1 sale against 'C' Form . 5. The consignment left Sangaria in Rajasthan for Machhiwara in Punjab. On 06.12.2013, the vehicle loaded with the consignment was checked by the Excise and Taxation Officer, Mobile Wing, Fazilka (Punjab). The driver presented the said invoices, the GR and a weight note issued by M/s Nav Durga Industries. The detaining officer was of the view that this was not a genuine E-1 sale and forwarded the case to the AETC, who issued a notice to the appellants, who according to him are the owners of the goods. The AETC noticed that the appellants had affixed the mark 'ST' on the consignment. The Department contends that this was a reference to M/s S.T. Cottex Exports Pvt. Ltd. It was also noticed that the goods were not accompanied by the Vat 49 Form as required by the Government of Rajasthan. The AETC o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate sales. (1) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (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 to a registered dealer, 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 from tax under this sub-section unless the dealer effecting the sale furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner and within the prescribed time or within such further time as that authority may, for sufficient cause, permit,- (a) a certificate duly filled and signed by the registered dealer from whom the goods were purchased containing the prescribed particulars in a prescribed form obtained from the prescribed authority; and (b) if the subsequent sale is made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccasioned the movement of such goods or has been effected by a transfer of documents of title to such goods during their movement from one State to another. The sale may fall in either of these categories. Mr. Mittal contends that the first sale is the one between M/s Nav Durga Industries and the appellant. This sale was not effected by a transfer of documents of title to the goods. As noted earlier an invoice was issued by M/s Nav Durga Industries to the appellant which by itself does not indicate an inter-state sale. The mere mention of the appellant i.e. the purchaser in that sale as belonging to Ahmedabad does not establish an inter-state sale. However, the invoice must be read with the lorry receipt ( for short LR ). The LR refers to the lorry/truck number, the date of the transaction and indicates that the goods were to be transported from Rajasthan to Punjab. The sale, therefore, was in the course of inter-state trade or commerce. It is important to note that M/s Nav Durga Industries, Rajasthan is named as the consigner and the appellant is named as a consignee. Thus the sale between M/s Nav Durga Industries and the appellant occasioned the movement of goods from one Sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not have sold the goods to M/s S.T.Cottex Exports Pvt. Ltd. if it did not have or was not entitled to the same itself unless of course it was a forward certificate. The respondents, however, have contended that this was really a direct sale by M/s Nav Durga Industries to M/s S.T.Cottex Exports Pvt. Ltd. or by the appellant arranging both the sales simultaneously. That, however, would be a disputed question of fact in respect whereof the evidence is insufficient. The order of remand would enable both the parties to adduce evidence in support of their rival contentions. 13. The matter, however, does not end here. In addition to the sale between the appellant and M/s S.T.Cottex Exports Pvt. Ltd. being subsequent to the sale between the appellant and M/s Nav Durga Industries, the sale by the appellant to M/s S.T.Cottex Exports Pvt. Ltd. must have been during such movement i.e. movement of the goods from one State to another i.e. from Rajasthan to Punjab. Even assuming that this was a sale by transfer of documents of title to the goods by virtue of the endorsement on the reverse of the LR, it would be a disputed question of fact as to whether the sale between the appellant and M/s S. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ON 51. ESTABLISHMENT OF INFORMATION COLLECTION CENTRES OR CHECK POSTS AND INSPECTION OF GOODS IN TRANSIT: (7) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx (b) The designated officer shall, before conducting the enquiry, serve a notice on the consignor or consignee of the goods detained under clause (a) of sub-section (6), and give him an opportunity of being heard and if, after the enquiry, such officer finds that there has been an attempt to avoid or evade the tax due or likely to be due under this Act, he shall, by order, impose on the consignor or consignee of the goods, a penalty, which shall be equal to thirty percent of the value of the goods. In case he finds otherwise, he shall order release of the goods and the vehicle, if not already released, after recording reasons in writing and shall decide the matter finally within a period of fourteen days from the commencement of the enquiry proceedings. 16. It is true that no tax is payable in respect of these transactions under the Punjab Vat Act. However, the mis-declaration in respect of the consignment would invite the penalty under Section 51(7)(b) nevertheless. Section 51(7)(b) would come into operation, if it is fou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
