1989 (8) TMI 335 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment orders of Sales Tax Officer for multiple financial years, Allegations of evasion of Central sales tax, Dispute over intrastate or inter-State sales transactions, Availability of alternative remedies under the law for challenging assessment orders, Examination of outgoing registers at Girisola check-gate, Discrepancies in the documents regarding consignor and consignee details, Disputed facts leading to the need for fact-finding by appellate authorities, Reference to relevant legal precedents on sales tax matters.

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged assessment orders by the Sales Tax Officer for various financial years, alleging evasion of Central sales tax. The dispute arose over whether the transactions were intrastate or inter-State sales. The Sales Tax Officer reopened assessment proceedings based on reports of fraud, claiming that the petitioners evaded Central sales tax by showing intrastate sales as inter-State sales. The petitioners contended that all sales occurred at their business premises, and the responsibility for transporting goods outside the state lay with the purchasers. The opposite parties argued that the petitioners concealed inter-State sale transactions and attempted tax evasion, leading to assessments under Central Sales Tax Rules.

The counter by the opposite parties emphasized that the determination of intrastate or inter-State sales was a factual matter falling within the jurisdiction of appellate authorities. They highlighted discrepancies in the documents, such as way-bills and registers, indicating the petitioners' involvement in inter-State transactions. The opposite parties denied the petitioners' claim of never paying Central sales tax, citing past assessments for inter-State sales. They asserted that the petitioners concealed such transactions, justifying the assessments under Central Sales Tax Rules.

The examination of outgoing registers at Girisola check-gate revealed entries showing the petitioners as consignors of goods destined for Andhra Pradesh. The court directed the production of these registers to ascertain the details further. However, after a detailed review of the facts and arguments, the court found conflicting evidence and disputed facts, necessitating fact-finding by the appellate authorities. The court referred to legal precedents emphasizing the need for utilizing available remedies under the law for challenging assessment orders, rather than direct petitions to the High Court.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the writ petitions, advising the petitioners to pursue appeals before the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax and the Sales Tax Tribunal, despite the limitation issue. The judgment underscored the importance of fact-finding by the appellate authorities in resolving the dispute over intrastate or inter-State sales transactions.