Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Air India Ltd. Air India (Formerly Known as Indian Airlines) Versus Commissioner of Sales Tax, Delhi

Sales tax - services of civil aviation including the running of aircraft, ferrying of passengers and goods through air routes in both the domestic and international sectors - As part of running its business, it sells scrap, depleted parts and sometimes even out-dated or unused aircraft - whether petitioner is liable to pay sales tax on such sales, under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975? - Held that: - matter referred to Larger Bench to decide the issue Whether the sale of unserviceable (rejected) a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n, Mr. Rhishabh Jetley, Advocates. ORDER 1. The Petitioner, Air India Ltd. (hereafter Air India ) is involved in offering air transportation services. As part of running its business, it sells scrap, depleted parts and sometimes even out-dated or unused aircraft. The question that arises is whether it is liable to pay sales tax on such sales, under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 ( DST Act ). 2. The judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. DTC, 1996 III AD (Delhi) 462 (hereafter DTC .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AY ) 1994-95 which resulted in ST. Ref. 4/2004. Thereafter the Petitioner challenged the assessments made for AYs 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 which resulted in ST. Ref. 1/2015, ST.Ref. 2/2015 and ST. Ref. 3/2015. Brief Facts 4. The Petitioner is engaged in the services of civil aviation including the running of aircraft, ferrying of passengers and goods through air routes in both the domestic and international sectors. Till 1974, the Petitioner was registered with the Sales Tax Authorities as a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in AY 1994-95 and thereafter in AYs 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98. The assessment proceedings finally resulted in appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, Sales Tax, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ), which upheld the assessment. 6. Before the Tribunal, the contention of the Petitioner was that its main activity is of running the aircraft and providing services of carriage of passengers and goods, which does not constitute sale of goods in Delhi. Hence it was not amenable to sales ta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1994-95 and observed as under: The main objects of the appellant company leave no doubt as to the appellant's business as airline as well as to buy, sell and deal in aircrafts etc. The appellant s case, to our mind, is quite different from DTC and AP Road Transport Corporation relied upon by the appellant. 8. Thus, according to the Tribunal, the case of the Petitioner is different from the judgment in DTC (supra) and the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad v. The Comme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

st May, 2003 referred the following questions to this Court for AY 1994-95: (1) Whether in the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the activity of the Indian Airlines Limited is commerce covered under the definition of business in clause (i) of Section 2(c) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975? (2) If the answer to question No.1 is in the affirmative, whether in the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

orporation? (4) Whether in the facts and under the circumstances of the case when the dealer did not impart the information to his assessing Authority, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the knowledge and information with the other assessing authorities or the Enforcement Wing could not be imputed to the Assessing Authority of the dealer for the purpose of re-assessment? AYs 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 10. The assessment for AYs 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 were upheld by the Tribuna .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the dealer was liable for penalty? 11. On 7th December, 2015, ST. Ref. 1/2015, ST. Ref. 2/2015 and ST. Ref. 3/2015 were tagged alongwith ST. Ref. 4/2004. Thus, the present 4 reference cases require decision in the above 6 questions referred to this Court. Provisions of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 12. The question that arises is whether the Petitioner is a dealer which is carrying on business of selling goods in Delhi in respect of the scrap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and (ii) any transaction in connection with, or incidental or ancillary to, such trade, commerce, manufacture, adventure or concern; (e) dealer means any person who carries on business of selling goods in Delhi and includes - (i) the Central Government or a State Government carrying on such business; (ii) an incorporated society (including a cooperative society), club or association which sells or supplies goods, whether or not in the course of business, to its members for cash or for deferred p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or by the principal or a nominee of the principal. Petitioner s Submissions 13. Mr. Mukul Gupta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, relies heavily on the judgment of this Court in DTC (supra) to submit that the activity of the Petitioner is no different from that of the DTC. Mr. Gupta submits that the word such as appearing in Section 2 (c) (ii) of the DST Act takes colour from the main activity referred to in Section 2 (c) (i) of the Act and cannot be alienated therefrom. 14. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

scrap and spare parts is also not amenable to sales tax. 15. Mr. Gupta further contends that civil aviation services provided by the Petitioner is not a business as per Section 2 (c) of the DST Act. Mr. Gupta sought to reinforce his submissions by placing reliance upon State of Tamil Nadu vs. Burma Shell Oil Co. Ltd., [1973] 31 STC 426 (SC) (hereafter Burma Shell Oil Co. Ltd. ) and State of Gujarat vs. Raipur Manufacturing Co. Ltd.,[1967] 19 STC 1 (SC) (hereafter Raipur Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

96-97 and 1997-98 respectively. Thus according to Mr. Gupta the revenues from sale of scrap and aircraft were minuscule as compared to the overall revenues of the Petitioner. Moreover, the Petitioner cannot change its nature of activity without the prior approval of the Central Government and hence it is not very different from a statutory corporation. Thus the predominant part of the Petitioner's revenues was from the main business of carrying passengers and baggage services which is not am .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n by the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu vs. Board of Trustee of the Port of Madras, AIR 1999 SC 1647 (hereafter Port of Madras ). He thus submits that both DTC (supra) and Port of Madras (supra) apply squarely to the facts of the present case and hence no sales tax would be payable by the Petitioner. Respondent s Submissions 18. On the other hand, Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents, submits that the present case is clearly distinguishable fr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssistant Commercial Taxation Officer AIR 1976 SC 489, • Controller of Stores Central Railway vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax Maharashtra State, Bombay, [1995] 99 STC 222 (Bom), • Member Board of Revenue West Bengal vs. Controller of Stores, Eastern Railway, Calcutta AIR 1989 SC 1468, 19. Mr Ghose also referred to the decision in M.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, 1995 MPLJ 696 (hereafter MPSRTC') and that this decision is authority to the proposition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rrying on any kind of business and thus factually, the decision in DTC (supra) is distinguishable in its application to the case above. Mr. Ghose submitted that if Clause (ii) of Section 2(c) were to be interpreted as being dependent on the applicability of Clause (i) then it would be rendered totally redundant. Reference to Larger Bench 20. After hearing arguments of the parties, it is clear that the various cases cited before us deal with different modes of transportation, namely, road, rail a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Forum: GST Invoice

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version