9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner. By this order, the challenge made by the Petitioner to the show cause notice, issued by the Corporation calling upon the Petitioner to register itself as "Dealer/Importer" for the purpose of assessment and levy of local body tax, has been rejected. The Commissioner has reasoned that the Petitioner is working as "commission agent" as it imports goods from outside and delivers goods to the buyer located within the limits of the Municipal Corporation, Pune by collecting necessary charges from the buyers, which operation and transaction makes the Petitioner to be an importer of goods sold by it as Commission Agent to the individual buyer, who purchases goods through the internet platform, which stands in the name of "Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd.". 5. Learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the impugned order is illegal and by no stretch of imagination, the Petitioner, considering it's role in the whole transaction, could be termed to be either a "Dealer" or "Commission Agent" or "Importer" within the meaning of the relevant provisions of The Maharashtra Municipal Corporation (Local Body Tax) Rules, 2015, r/w. relevant provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, 18 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the relevant provisions of the LBT rules and also the MMC Act. He, therefore, submits that it can be said that the Petitioner is amenable to levy of the LBT. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has invited our attention to Rules 3 and 7 of the Maharashtra Local Body Tax Rules and Sections 2(16A) and 2(28A) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. 10. Insofar as operations carried on and indulged in by the Petitioner are concerned, there is no dispute. Undisputedly, the Petitioner is the Logistics Service Provider and is the agency, which delivers goods on behalf of Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. to an individual buyer upon completion of the transaction of sale of goods between individual buyer and individual seller by using platform of the Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd.. This is the nature of the operation and transaction undertaken by the Petitioner. 11. Now, the question is - Whether the Petitioner would be an entity which is liable for assessment and levy of LBT ? The question can be answered by ascertaining as to whether or not the relevant provisions of law contemplate for levy of LBT the kind of operations the Petitioner is carrying on. Let us, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... simply delivering them to a person who has bought the goods for use or consumption or sale and so on. In none of these instances, the person bringing the goods into the city limits would be covered by above definition of the term "importer". 13. In the present case, the goods which are brought from outside by the Petitioner into the limits of Pune Municipal Corporation, as can be seen from the operations carried out by the Petitioner, are not for his own use or for earning commission or sale, but are for the purpose of being delivered at the door step of the individual buyer. In other words, what the Petitioner is doing here is import of goods for the purpose of delivery to some other person and for this purpose, the Petitioner acts like a courier or postman or delivery person. Thus, activity of the Petitioner would not be covered by the definition of the word "importer". If the Petitioner cannot be called to be a person who "imports" goods into the city limits for use or consumption or sale and if the Petitioner is also not the person who is alleged to be selling or buying goods for commission or remuneration or otherwise in the city, the Petitioner would not be a "dealer" withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of such goods. (4) If the non-resident dealer shows to the Commissioner, that the local body tax has been paid by the manager or agent residing in the City, then the non-resident dealer shall not be liable to pay local body tax again in respect of the same goods." It would be clear from Rule 3 that even though it does not directly lay down any conditions and requirements for registration for the purpose of assessment and levy of LBT, it prescribes limits in terms of value of goods or turnover of sales or purchases, as the case may be for registration and in doing so it prescribes that such limits for registration would be applicable to a dealer who is an importer and who imports goods, value of which is not less than Rs.1 Lakh during the year or a dealer who is not importer but whose turnover of all sales or purchases during the year is not less than Rs.5 Lakhs. Thus, the requirement of registration for the purpose of assessment and levy of LBT under Rule 3 of LBT Rules, has been prescribed only in case of a dealer who is an importer or whose turnover of all sales or purchases during the year is not less than the amount prescribed therein. This rule does not refer t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
