TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 817X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowing the decision of this Court in Tube Investment of India Ltd., v. State of Tamil Nadu [2010 (10) TMI 938 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], the Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 19.05.2014 allowed the appeal filed by the dealer stating that since the export sale is fully covered by the definition of sale under Section 2(n) read with Explanation 3(a) of the TNGST Act, the Assessing authority cannot lev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral Sales Tax Act, 1959 by the Commercial Tax Officer, Mettupalayam Road Circle, Coimbatore in his proceedings dated 14.01.2004. At that time of check of accounts, the Assessing Authority found that the dealer has exported finished goods after using raw materials purchased against Form XVII and therefore, the Assessing Authority levied tax under Section 3(4) of the TNGST Act on a turnover of ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 2(n) read with Explanation 3(a) of the TNGST Act, the Assessing authority cannot levy tax under Section 3(4) of the Act. Aggrieved against the order of the Tribunal, State has filed the instant Tax case (Revision) on the following substantial questions of law. 1. Whether the order of the Appellate Tribunal is correct in interpreting the expression does not sell the goods so manufactured ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 cannot be regarded as an interstate sale? 4. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in construing that the levy of tax attracted under Section 3(4) of the Act in the event of export sale of the manufactured goods as being a direct levy on the export sale itself and thus contravening Article 286 of the Constitution? 5. Whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et of facts and substantial questions of law, following the decision of this Court in Tube Investment of India Ltd., v. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in [2010] 36 VST 67 (Mad.), and other similar cases, we dismissed Tax Case Revision No.47 of 2017, filed by the State, at the admission stage itself. 6. As the instant Tax Case (Revision) is similar, following the decision in Tube Investment of In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
