TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT PETITION) [ 2004 (1) TMI 365 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that an order passed under Sub-Section (2) of Section 6A can be subject matter of reopening of a proceeding under Section 16 of the State Act was not correct. Petition allowed. - W.P.Nos.7252 & 7253 of 2010, MP.Nos.1 & 1 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 17-9-2019 - THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH For the Petitioner : Mrs.C.P.Priya For the Respondent : Mr.Mohd. Shafiq, Special Government Pleader ORDER The writ petitions challenges orders dated 24.02.2010 passed by the the Commercial Tax Officer in terms of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short 'Act') for the periods 2003-04 and 2004-05. 2. Admittedly, the assessments have been completed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 6A is conclusive, it must a fortiorari follow that the same is binding. 104. The particulars required to be furnished in Form F clearly manifest that the proof required is as to whether the goods were factually transferred to the assessee himself or his branch office or his agent and not to any third party. Any other enquiry is beyond the realm of the assessing authority. 105. It is true that this Court in Ashok Leyland (supra) upon consideration of the matter holding that no statutory conclusiveness had been attached by reason of a legal fiction in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 6A. This Court opined: After all Section 6A is also one of the provisions of this Act. There is no reason to e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... risdictional fact renders the order ultra vires and bad... 107. In South India Corporation (P) Ltd. v. Secretary. Board of Revenue: [1964] 4 SCR 280, this Court has held that special provisions shall prevail over the general provisions. 108. It is further trite that an administrative authority or a quasi- judicial authority while adjudicating upon a lis is obligated to pose and answer a right question so as to enable it to arrive at a conclusion as to whether he has jurisdiction in the matter or not. By reason of a legal fiction which becomes attracted in terms of determination made thereunder, the provisions of the Central Act shall stand excluded.. 109. In A.V. Fernandez v. the State of Kerala: [1957] 1 SCR 837, this Court obse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tified with transactions effected by the registered office, Pathak, J., as the learned Chief Justice-then was, observed : ..We are unable to agree. Even if, as in the present case, the buyer places an order with the branch office and the branch office communicates the terms and specifications of the orders to the registered office and the branch office itself is concerned with the sales dispatching, billing and receiving of the sale price, the conclusion must be that the order placed by the buyer is an order placed with the Company and for the purpose of fulfilling that order the manufactured goods commence their journey from the registered office within the State of Andhra Pradesh to the branch office outside the State for delivery of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
