1968 (9) TMI 100 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of a District Magistrate to issue a distress warrant against movables in a different state.
2. Applicability of the Madras General Sales Tax Act in Pondicherry State.
3. Validity of executing a warrant for sales tax recovery in Pondicherry State.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The petitioners sought a writ of prohibition against the State of Madras to prevent the execution of a warrant issued under section 24(2)(b) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act in Pondicherry State. The main issue was whether the District Magistrate in Cuddalore had jurisdiction to issue a distress warrant against the petitioners' movables in Pondicherry State. The court clarified that the question of sales not being effected in Madras State was not within the purview of the writ proceedings, as it was being addressed before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The court emphasized that the enforcement of the warrant outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court was not limited to the State and extended to the whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioners relied on a Supreme Court decision regarding the surrender of sales tax legislation by the Pondicherry Assembly in favor of the Madras Legislature, which deemed the Pondicherry Sales Tax Act void. However, the court deemed this argument irrelevant to the case at hand, emphasizing that the focus should be on the execution of the warrant for sales tax recovery under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The court highlighted that the procedure adopted for recovering the sales tax amount as a fine was in line with the standard practice for collecting fines from individuals residing in Pondicherry State.

3. Ultimately, the court dismissed the writ petition and the connected criminal revision case, upholding the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate to issue the distress warrant against the petitioners' movables in Pondicherry State for the recovery of the sales tax amount under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The court concluded that the procedure followed for the realization of the sales tax amount was valid and in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.