2010 (4) TMI 1016 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Petitioner seeks quashing of proceedings rejecting exemption claim for stock transfer turnover and higher tax rate imposition due to unavailability of declaration forms C and F. Application for fresh assessment based on available form F rejected for not filing within 90 days.

Assessment based on declaration forms: The petitioner's claim for exemption and concessional levy was rejected due to unavailability of forms C and F at the buyers' end, resulting in imposition of higher tax rate. The petitioner later obtained form F on January 12, 2010, but form C was still pending. The application for fresh assessment based on form F was rejected for not being filed within 90 days, as per Rule 4 of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Rules, which allows modification of assessment order upon filing the declaration within the specified period.

Legal interpretation and decision: The Court examined the provisions of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Rules regarding the time limit for furnishing forms C and D. While the Central Sales Tax Rules do not specify a time limit, the State has the authority to set its own rules. The Court found that rejection of the claim based on the 90-day time limit under the Act was unjustified, considering the petitioner's reliance on other State dealers for the forms. Referring to a Full Bench decision, the Court emphasized that belated form C can be accepted with good and sufficient reasons. Despite the time limit prescribed under Pondicherry Central Sales Tax Rules, the Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondent to accept form F and grant relief to the petitioner, subject to assessing authority's satisfaction.

Conclusion: The Court allowed the writ petition, highlighting that the Rules in question were under the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Rules, not the Central Sales Tax Rules. The respondent was directed to accept the form F submitted by the petitioner and provide necessary relief, while leaving open the question of the validity of such a rule. No costs were awarded, and related motions were closed.