9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (11) TMI 873 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxDisallowance of the exemption from tax on the turnover and levying tax at the rate of 10 per cent as outright inter-State sales in the absence of C form, by an order dated May 7, 1980 Held that - The comparison of the orders placed by Rallis India Limited, Bombay, to the Cochin Branch or to the appellant s factory at Ooty does not make any link between the despatches regularly carried out by the appellant s factory. For example in the month of August 13 despatches were effected, in September 22 despatches were made, in October 5 despatches were made, in November 14 despatches were made, in December 4 despatches were made, in January 11 despatches were made, in February 5 despatches were made and in March 5 despatches were made. Thus there is no consistency or link between the export made by Rallis India Limited and the despatches of goods carried out by the appellant s company. The set of facts held for the year , from the foregoing analysis is the similar one as decided by the High Court of Madras in the case of Rallis India Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu 1990 (9) TMI 336 - MADRAS HIGH COURT . the Department has not made out any case to interfere with the well-considered order of the Tribunal. Appeal dismissed.
Issues:
1. Revision of assessment order and limitation period under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. 2. Disallowance of exemption from tax on turnover related to branch transfer. 3. Interpretation of facts and application of legal principles in determining tax liability. 4. Consideration of factual differences between cases and application of precedents. 5. Review of orders by different appellate authorities and the Tribunal. Issue 1: Revision of assessment order and limitation period under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959: The case involved a writ petition against an order dated October 5, 1999, related to an assessment year from 1973-74. The assessing officer revised the assessment order disallowing exemption from tax on a specific turnover. The appeal process led to conflicting decisions by different authorities, including the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Joint Commissioner. The High Court had previously remanded the case to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to consider the matter afresh. The Tribunal ultimately granted relief to the assessee, which was challenged in the writ petition by the Department. The Tribunal's decision was based on the application of legal principles and factual considerations, which the Department contested. Issue 2: Disallowance of exemption from tax on turnover related to branch transfer: The core issue revolved around the turnover of ossein despatched to Cochin to fulfill orders from Rallis (India) Limited. The dispute centered on the eligibility for exemption from tax as a branch transfer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal analyzed the factual scenario, including the despatch of goods and the contractual relationships involved. The Tribunal's decision was based on a detailed examination of the documents and the regular despatches made by the assessee to Cochin for sale to Rallis India Limited for export purposes. The Tribunal found that the factual position supported the application of a precedent judgment in a similar case involving ossein transfers. Issue 3: Interpretation of facts and application of legal principles in determining tax liability: The Tribunal's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the facts, including the dates of despatch, quantities, and the purpose of the despatches. The Tribunal considered the regularity of despatches and the absence of a direct contractual obligation between the assessee and the foreign buyer. The decision highlighted the nature of the despatches as stock transfers for export purposes, not liable to tax. The Tribunal's findings were aligned with legal principles and precedents, emphasizing the absence of a sale occasioning the movement of goods. Issue 4: Consideration of factual differences between cases and application of precedents: The Department contended that the Tribunal applied the precedent judgment mechanically without considering the factual variances between the cited case and the present matter. However, the Tribunal's decision was based on a detailed comparison of the factual circumstances, including the despatch patterns, contractual relationships, and the purpose of despatches. The Tribunal found that the factual position in the present case was similar to the precedent case, justifying the application of the legal principles established in the earlier judgment. Issue 5: Review of orders by different appellate authorities and the Tribunal: The case involved a series of appeals and orders by various authorities, leading to conflicting decisions on the tax liability related to the turnover of ossein despatched to Cochin. The Tribunal, as the ultimate fact-finding authority, extensively reviewed the facts, documents, and legal principles before granting relief to the assessee. The Tribunal's decision was based on a comprehensive analysis of the activity of the assessee, the purpose of despatches, and the absence of a sale occasioning the movement of goods. The High Court, considering the age of the assessment year and absence of merit for interference, dismissed the writ petition. This detailed analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the legal judgment, covering all significant issues and aspects involved in the case.
|
