Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 1981 (10) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1981 (10) TMI 169 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues involved: Interpretation of provisions of Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971 and Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 regarding the levy of surcharge on sales of jaggery and the applicability of penalty u/s 22 for collection of surcharge.

Summary:
The High Court of Madras heard a revision petition filed by the State against the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal's order regarding the levy of penalty on an assessee for collecting surcharge on sales of cane jaggery. The Tribunal had held that the collection of surcharge on cane jaggery sales did not fall under the purview of section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, and thus, the penalty was deemed illegal.

The Court analyzed the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971, which mandated surcharge on sales tax under certain conditions. It was noted that the assessee, dealing in jaggery, was not liable to any tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act for jaggery sales but had collected surcharge. The Court emphasized that the surcharge could only be collected from those eligible for tax under the General Sales Tax Act, which was not the case here.

Regarding the application of penalty u/s 22 of the General Sales Tax Act, the Court highlighted that the section prohibits the collection of tax by unregistered dealers and imposes penalties for such actions. However, in this instance, the assessee had collected surcharge, not tax, and the Court concluded that there was no scope for levying a penalty u/s 22 for the collection of surcharge based on the restrictive wording of the provisions.

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the tax case, ruling in favor of the assessee, and decided not to award any costs in the matter.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates