TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 956X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SUGARS LIMITED [ 2018 (1) TMI 1698 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] , though it has been concluded that, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that, additional sales tax cannot be levied, since the taxable turnover for the whole year was determined as Rs.43,03,53,904/-, which is below Rs.100 crores in a year, there is no discussion as to why the other two decisions rendered in the cases of PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT), FAST TRACT ASSESSMENT CIRCLE II, AND OTHERS [ 2004 (5) TMI 538 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] National Time Company [ 2010 (7) TMI 842 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] stand dissented. The case remanded back to the original Authority to reconsider the demand of additional sales tax under the provisions of the Tami ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Levy of additional tax in the case of certain dealers: (1)(a) The tax payable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act I of 1959) (hereinafter in this Section referred to as the said Act), shall, in the case of a dealer whose taxable turnover for a year exceeds [ten lakhs of rupees], be increased by an additional tax calculated at the following rates, namely: Table 1: (i) Where the taxable turnover exceeds ten lakhs of rupees, but does not exceed one crore of rupees Provided that no additional tax shall be payable under this item for the first ten lakhs of rupees of the taxable turnover. 1.5 per cent of the taxable turnover (ii) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakhs of rupees of the taxable turnover. 1.5 per cent of the taxable turnover (ii) Where the taxable turnover exceeds one crore of rupees but does not exceed five crores of rupees 2 per cent of the taxable turnover (iii) Where the taxable turnover exceeds five crores of rupees but does not exceed ten crores of rupees 2.25 per cent of the taxable turnover (iv) Where the taxable turnover exceeds ten crores of rupees but does not exceed three hundred crores of rupees 2.5 per cent of the taxable turnover (v) Where the taxable turnover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... make it clear that we are striking down only clause (a) of section 2(l). We also make it clear that under Section (2) and 2(3), the intention of the Legislature not to pass on the burden of additional sales tax to the consumers and the reference to prosecution, shall stand unaltered. So far as section 2(1)(aa) as amended by Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1996, the following words shall stand deleted as obnoxious: (1) The words in this State after the words, Principal selling or buying goods in section 2(1)(aa) as well as in Explanation to section 2(1)(aa). (2) The words other than a casual trader or agent of a non-resident dealer or a local branch of a firm or company situated outside the State in section 2(l)(aa). If the above directi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Siemens case (supra). 11. Reference is made to the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Philips India Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Chennai reported in (2004) 137 STC 134 Madras and yet another decision of the co-ordinating Bench of this Court in the case of State of Tamilnadu vs. National Time Company reported in (2010) SCC Online Mad. 3781. 12. By way of rejoinder, learned counsel for the Petitioner in W.P.No.8875 of 2007 submits that, the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Philips India Limited referred to supra is distinguished on facts and therefore, submits that, the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is liable to be set aside. 13. We have considered th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is below Rs.100 crores in a year, there is no discussion as to why the other two decisions rendered in the cases of Philips India Limited and National Time Company (supra) stand dissented. However, it is noted that, the said Bench has taken a contra view in T.C.(R) No.23 of 2018 vide order dated 19.02.2018 in the case of Deputy Commissioner (CT) vs. R.P.Tikmany. 16. We are of the view that, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Philips India Limited (supra) and National Time Company (supra) decided the issue and therefore, the levy and collection of additional sales tax has to be strictly in accordance with the decisions rendered therein. Hence, we do not find any reasons to take a different view. 17. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
