2015 (5) TMI 413 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Denial of exemption claim - Assessing Officer under the CST disallowed claim of exemption of Sales Tax at High Sea Sales on the ground that the Respondent dealer did not produce bill of lading and other important documents to prove such a sale - Tribunal confirmed the tax levied on interstate sales, but set aside the levying of custom duty at 8% by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax - Held that - Assessing Authority as also the Appellate Authority ought to have recorded a finding that there is no evidence to support the fact that the Custom Duty was paid by the Assessee before the delivery of the goods, namely Quality Prime Tinplates to M/s. Raja Crown and Cans Pvt. Ltd. If there is no evidence pointed out to support this fact, then we do not see how the Tribunal committed any error in allowing the Appeals partly. The levy of Sales Tax at 8% on Custom Duty in the present case was not justified and rightly deleted. These are not findings which would raise any wider questions and particularly of law. In the peculiar facts and circumstances and looking into the documents produced, the Tribunal concluded that there is no evidence to support the concurrent finding as rendered by the Assessing Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. - finding does not raise any question of law for being answered and opined upon by this Court - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Seeking direction to forward questions of law to the Court, assessment orders under BST and CST, disallowance of exemption of Sales Tax at High Sea Sales, confirmation of decision by Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax, partial allowance of Second Appeals by Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal, dismissal of reference applications by Tribunal.

Analysis:
The applications sought a direction to forward questions of law to the Court regarding assessment orders under BST and CST. The dealer, a multilocational company engaged in manufacturing heavy engineering equipment, received a refund under BST but faced demands under CST due to disallowance of exemption of Sales Tax at High Sea Sales. The Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax confirmed the decision of the Assessing Officer, leading to the dealer filing Second Appeals before the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, confirming tax on interstate sales but setting aside the levy of custom duty. Reference applications by the Revenue arising from the Second Appeals were dismissed by the Tribunal.

The Court considered whether the Custom Duty was part of the sales prices charged and recovered by the dealer. The Tribunal found that the assumption of the Assessing Officer was incorrect, as the purchaser was responsible for paying the Custom Duty. The Court noted that there was no evidence to support the fact that the Custom Duty was paid by the dealer before delivering the goods to the purchaser. As a result, the levy of Sales Tax on Custom Duty was deemed unjustified and rightly deleted by the Tribunal. The Court concluded that the findings did not raise any wider questions of law, as the Tribunal had thoroughly examined the evidence and documents presented. Therefore, the Court dismissed the applications as devoid of merits.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues related to assessment orders under BST and CST, disallowance of Sales Tax exemption, confirmation by the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax, partial allowance of Second Appeals by the Tribunal, and dismissal of reference applications. The Court's analysis focused on the Custom Duty component in sales prices, highlighting the lack of evidence supporting the Assessing Officer's decision and affirming the Tribunal's deletion of Sales Tax on Custom Duty. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual findings and concluded that no questions of law were raised for the Court's opinion.