9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 233X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that portion of the inter-State sales wherein C-Forms were produced for part of the amount covering the provisional bill raised by the assessee, which, however, did not include the deferred payment to a negligible extent made by the purchaser after the furnishing of C-Forms? (ii) Ought not the Tribunal have held that the C-Form issued was with respect to a composite sale transaction and the fact that there was a deferred payment which was not included in the particulars of C-Form would not take the sale out of one under Section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956? 2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the assessee submits that as a matter of practise as also the instructions of the Government of India, the petitioner is making ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... res, while the deferred payment, which is levied higher tax, is only 4% of the total turnover of inter-State sales. The AO himself has found that there is no separate sale and that the deferred payment is on the basis of the practise existing in the industry argues the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that the statutory mandate has to be strictly followed, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Indian Agencies, Bangalore v. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore [AIR 2005 SC 1594]. 5. Section 8(1) and 8(4) of the CST Act read with Rule 12 of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 makes it clear that concessional rate can be availed by the selling dealer only if the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecifically prohibited by a Division Bench decision of this Court in Kochi Refineries Ltd. v. State of Kerala [2011 (4) KHC 340]. The assessment years are 2005-06 and 2006-07 and after more than a decade, the assessee cannot be permitted to produce CForms which relates to long prior assessment years. 7. We garner support in answering the questions of law in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee from Indian Agencies, Bangalore (supra), from which we extract paragraphs 10 and 23, which are as follows: "10......Section 8(4) specifically provides that the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to any sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the prescribed authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from getting the concessional rate. Even otherwise, in our view, it is a pure question of law as to the proper interpretation of the provisions of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act and the provisions of Rule 12 of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 and Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Sales Tax (Karnataka) Rules, 1957. In view of the decision of this Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. (supra) [(1965) 3 SCR 626] and of the decision in Delhi Automobiles (P) Ltd. (supra) [STC Vol.48 1981], it is clear that these provisions have to be strictly construed and that unless there is strict compliance with the provisions of the statute, the assessee was not entitled to the concessional rate of tax". Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
