9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1983 (4) TMI 232 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxThe assessees, manufacturers of automobile trucks, supplied raw materials like sheets, rods and other iron and steel materials to ancillary products manufacturers of their required component parts and made debit notes against such ancillary industries in respect of the supply of raw materials and credit notes after delivery of finished components and the raw materials were shown not in terms of weight but in terms of cost of materials in debit notes and made payments for services rendered Held, that there was no element of sale in the transaction between the assessee and the ancillary products manufacturers and they were only works contracts. The fact that the debit notes carried entries either in weight or in terms of money with reference to the raw materials was an immaterial factor when ultimately the finished products came back to the assessees.
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the supply of raw materials by the assessees to their customers on purchase orders were towards works contract not exigible to tax or were sales exigible to tax. 2. Whether the dismissal of the enhancement petition filed by the State is right in respect of turnover where original invoices had been cancelled and fresh invoices raised for the sale of vehicles either locally or outside the State and tax paid thereon under the local Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act. 3. Whether the transactions amounting to Rs. 5,13,968.53 are sales in the course of import and are exempt from taxation. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Works Contract vs. Sales Exigible to Tax The Tribunal found that the transactions between the assessees, who are manufacturers of automobile trucks, and the ancillary product manufacturers were works contracts and not sales. The assessees supplied raw materials to ancillary industries for the manufacture of component parts required for their trucks. Debit notes were issued for the raw materials, and credit notes were issued upon the return of finished products. The State contended that these transactions were outright sales based on the issuance of debit and credit notes, but the Tribunal, relying on precedents such as P.A. Raju Chettiar and Brothers v. State of Madras, held that the essence of the transactions was works contracts. The Tribunal's conclusion was deemed unassailable as the transactions involved the supply of raw materials for manufacturing and not the sale of goods. Issue 2: Dismissal of Enhancement Petition The assessing authority disallowed the claim under sales returns for which credit notes had been issued by the assessees. The original invoices issued by the respondent were cancelled, and fresh invoices were raised in favor of different entities, with tax paid under the local Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that the credit notes were genuine and granted exemption from tax. The State argued against this exemption, but the Tribunal found that the original invoices were cancelled in toto, and fresh invoices were raised with tax duly paid. Thus, the Tribunal upheld the exemption granted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Issue 3: Sales in the Course of Import The assessees claimed that certain transactions amounting to Rs. 5,13,988.53 were sales in the course of import and exempt from taxation. The Tribunal, after examining the facts, held that these transactions were indeed in the course of import. The assessees acted as agents for the actual users (Madras State Transport Authority and Southern Railway), and the goods were imported against the actual user's licence. The Tribunal relied on several precedents, including Voltas Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer and Blue Star Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu, to conclude that the sales were in the course of import and not exigible to tax. The Tribunal dismissed the State's argument that there were two sales (one by Ashok Leyland, U.K., to the assessees and another by the assessees to the actual users), holding that the transactions were integrated and occasioned the import. Conclusion: The Tribunal held all points against the revenue and dismissed the tax revision case, making no order as to costs.
|
