TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne. None for the respondents. JUDGMENT F.I. REBELLO, J. - The petitioner in the instant case is a Co-operative Sugar Factory registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act,1960. The petitioner by the present petition had challenged the constitutional validity of Section 206 of the Income Tax Act. That prayer has now been given up as learned Counsel fairly points out that the constitutional validity of the said provision has been upheld. The other prayer sought for by the petitioner is for a declaration that the orders of the 1 st and 2 nd respondents dated 26 th September, 1994 and 25 th February, 1994are illegal, invalid and without jurisdiction. There are some other consequential reliefs w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (i) Alcoholic Liquor for human One per cent (ii) Tendu leaves Five per cent (iii) Timber obtained under a Two and oneforest lease half per cent (iv) Timber obtained by any Two and onemode other than under a forest lease. half per cent (v) Any other forest produce not being timber or tendu Two and oneleaves. half per cent (vi) Scrap One percent. Provided that every person, being a seller shall at the time, during the period beginning on the 1 st day of June 2003 and ending on the day immediately preceding the date on which the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2003 comes into force, of debiting of the amount payable by the buyer to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as may be prescribed. (4)............... (5)............... (6) Any person responsible for collecting the tax who fails to collect the tax in accordance with the provisions of this section, shall, notwithstanding such failure, be liable to pay the tax to the credit of the Central Government in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3)." 3. The petitioners, considering the above provisions, had to collect tax from the purchasers. Some of the purchasers had challenged by way of Writ Petition the constitutional validity of Section 206-C. One of such petitions was Writ Petition No.1637 of 2003. Similarly, there were a large number of other petitions. By an order dated 30 th June, 1993 while granting Rule, interim relief was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. A statement had also been made on behalf of the petitioners that in so far as the persons from whom the tax was due to be collected in their final assessments they had applied order of refund. 4. A reply has been filed on 18 th July, 1996 by Shri C.R. Kadbhane, Income Tax Officer dealing with the issue as to whether most of the purchasers of the country liquor, their income tax assessment has resulted in a refund. It is set out that it is not possible to make any statement on affidavit as those assesses were spread over different geographical regions and was not possible to know what orders had been specifically passed in their cases. 7. None appears for the respondent Department at the time of hearing. 8. The short quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever, does it amount to 'failure to collect' when he was restrained from collecting the tax. Would he then be responsible to collect the tax. In the instant case admittedly considering the language of the interim relief itself the petitioner who otherwise was responsible for collecting the tax was prevented from collecting the tax. Once the petitioner was prevented from collecting the tax, it cannot be said that he was "a person responsible for collecting the tax". The responsibility would have arisen if he could collect the tax. The expression "responsible", therefore, has to be read in the context of statutory duty to collect which the petitioner was bound to perform by virtue of the provisions. The order of the Court would be binding and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
