2004 (11) TMI 548 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of liability to purchase tax under different enactments.
2. Precedence of special enactment over general enactment.
3. Competence of State Legislature to impose multiple taxes on the same commodity and event.

Analysis:
The case involves a dealer petitioning under section 42(2) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, seeking direction for the Sales Tax Tribunal to refer questions of law to the High Court. The petitioner, a sugar manufacturing company, faced an additional tax liability of Rs. 14,57,939 for the purchase of sugarcane under the Punjab Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953. The Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner held the petitioner liable to pay tax under the 1973 Act, leading to the dispute. The Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's appeal and review applications, prompting the High Court's intervention.

The High Court considered the petitioner's argument citing the Supreme Court judgment in Gobind Sugar Mills Limited v. State of Bihar [1999] 115 STC 358, emphasizing that the petitioner should not be taxed under the 1973 Act for sugarcane purchases already taxed under the 1953 Act. The court acknowledged the need to determine whether the petitioner is liable for purchase tax under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, or the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, while paying tax under the special enactment. Consequently, the High Court allowed the petition, directing the Tribunal to refer the crucial question for consideration.

In conclusion, the judgment delves into the complex interplay between general and special enactments governing purchase tax liability on the same commodity. It underscores the importance of legal precedence and the competence of the State Legislature in imposing taxes. The decision provides clarity on the specific issue raised by the petitioner, ensuring a comprehensive legal interpretation and resolution of the tax liability dispute.