2015 (9) TMI 1694 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Transfer of property in goods or not - petitioner were carrying food supplies on behalf of the Department of Food Civil Supplies, Government of Tripura - case of petitioner is that the work being done by them of transporting these food items does not fall within the ambit of the word sale - HELD THAT - The Commissioner of Taxes has filed a reply and has clearly admitted that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by this judgment - We could have disposed of the matter ourselves but we are of the view that the Commissioner himself should pass appropriate orders. The petitioner shall appear before the Commissioner of Taxes personally or through counsel on 26th September, 2015 at 11.00 a.m. On the said day, the Commissioner shall dispose of their applications for refund and shall issue orders that the amount shall be refunded along with statutory interest latest by 31st December, 2015. In case, the amount is not refunded by 31st December, 2015 then the interest shall be payable @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the writ petitions.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the term "sale" in the context of transporting food supplies for the Department of Food & Civil Supplies.
2. Application of a previous judgment to determine the nature of the transactions.
3. Direction for the Commissioner of Taxes to pass appropriate orders regarding refund.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Tripura High Court involved a case where petitioners were transporting food supplies for the Department of Food & Civil Supplies, claiming that this activity did not constitute a "sale." They relied on a previous judgment of the court that determined such transactions did not fall within the ambit of the phrase "transfer of property in goods." The Commissioner of Taxes admitted that the petitioners' case aligned with the earlier judgment and indicated readiness to take action accordingly. The court, while acknowledging it could have resolved the matter, directed the Commissioner to pass orders for refund applications. The petitioners were instructed to appear before the Commissioner for the disposal of their refund requests by a specified date, with interest payable if refunds were delayed beyond a set timeframe.