TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LTD. VERSUS STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS, TATA SKY LTD. VERSUS STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS [ 2015 (11) TMI 46 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT] . The question involved in the said petition was with respect to inviting value added tax on the goods provided by a DTH provider to its customer so that the customer could enjoy such service. It is also a case where concededly there was no sale of goods - Nevertheless the High Court referring to the decision of Supreme Court in case of BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. (BSNL) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [ 2006 (3) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] invoked the principle of transfer of right to use the goods. There are no hesitation in confirming the revisional order insofar as it pertains to the liability of the petitioner to pay t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stice Mr. Akil Kureshi, CJ And Hon ble Mr. Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay, J. For the Petitioner (s) : Mr. T.K. Deb, Advocate, Mr. N.D. Pal, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P.K. Dhar, Sr. G.A., Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A. JUDGMENT ORDER (ORAL) (Akil Kureshi, C.J.) Petitioner is a company registered under Companies Act and is engaged in the business of providing Direct to Home broadcasting services (DTH service, for short). It has operations in the State of Tripura. In order to provide such services to the customers, the petitioner provides free of cost certain equipments such as, Set Top Box, Smart Card, Low Noise Booster, Antenna, Cable, Connector, Clip tie etc. described under one umbrella expression of Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the subscribers. The revisional authority heavily relied on the decision of this Court in case of Bharti Telemedia Ltd. vrs. The State of Tripura and another dated 19.02.2015 in WP(C) No.563 of 2010 and connected petitions. For confirming the penalty the revisional authority recorded that the penalty was imposed after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We notice that the issues involved in the present petition are squarely covered by the decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Bharti Telemedia Ltd. (supra). The question involved in the said petition was with respect to inviting value added tax on the goods provided by a DTH provider to its customer so that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer of entering the premises of the customer. Most importantly as per the terms of the agreement, the companies are responsible for the functioning of the STBs only for a period of 6(six) months. The warranty is valid only for six months and thereafter there is no warranty. Therefore, if STB of a customer is spoiled after six months he will have to pay for repair or replacement of the same. We are of the considered view that this amounts to transfer of the right to use goods. 4. The issue involved in the present petition is thus covered by the judgment in case of Bharti Telemedia Ltd. (supra). We have, therefore, no hesitation in confirming the revisional order insofar as it pertains to the liability of the petitioner to pay tax with in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is always insisted upon. Further even on merits, we do not find that the petitioner carried any mala fide intention in not offering the said transaction to tax. The decision of this Court in case of Bharti Telemedia Ltd. (supra) was rendered on 19.02.2015. The entire period in question with which we are concerned was prior to the decision of this Court. It was otherwise an arguable issue. The petitioner can be stated to have carried a bona fide belief that the transaction in question is not exigible to tax. 6. In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and revisional authority confirming penalty against the petitioner are set aside. The petition succeeds only to this extent. Petition is dismissed. 7. Pending applicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
