2017 (11) TMI 468 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision of deemed assessments - sale of used car inside the state of Tamil Nadu - rectification of error - Jurisdiction of Stae to levy tax in inter-state sale - maintainability of petition - Held that - Though, the appellant has contended that it was only an error apparent on the face of the record, upon consideration of the material on record, writ Court, vide common order made in W.P.Nos.21169 to 21171 of 2017, has observed that the income tax certification, holds good only for the purpose of income tax assessment. Writ Court has also observed that when the deemed assessment have taken place, at the instance of the petitioner, who had filed the returns, duly supported by Form-WW Certificates by a Chartered Accountant, writ Court cannot embark upon a fact-finding exercise to examine the correctness of the stand taken by the respondent therein, to ascertain as to whether there was an error apparent on the face of the record. Under the scheme of the taxing statutes, even the question of jurisdiction, can always be raised before the concerned authorities. Common order of the writ Court made in W.P.Nos.21169 to 21171 of 2017 dated 09.08.2017, directing the appellant to avail the alternate remedy provided under the statute, cannot be said to be manifestly illegal warranting interference - petition dismissed being not maintainable.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Tamil Nadu government to levy tax on sales effected outside the state.
2. Rectification of clerical errors in tax returns under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.
3. Maintainability of writ petitions when an alternative statutory remedy is available.

Detailed Analysis:

Jurisdiction of the Tamil Nadu Government to Levy Tax:
The appellant contested that the Tamil Nadu government had no jurisdiction to levy tax on sales that occurred outside the state. The appellant argued that the cars were purchased and sold in Puducherry, and thus, the sales should be considered interstate sales. The court noted that the appellant's partner resided in Puducherry, and the cars were registered and sold there. However, the consideration for the sales was in the name of the appellant in Tamil Nadu. The court concluded that the issue of jurisdiction could be raised before the statutory authorities, as the taxing statutes provide a mechanism for such disputes.

Rectification of Clerical Errors in Tax Returns:
The appellant claimed that an inadvertent clerical error occurred in the monthly returns, where sales of used cars were wrongly reported under the 5% tax category. Petitions for rectification were filed under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The Assistant Commissioner (CT) reviewed the rectification petitions and concluded that the alleged error was not apparent from the returns or the audit report certified by a Chartered Accountant. The court upheld this view, stating that the rectification petitions were duly considered, and the mistake was not evident on the face of the record.

Maintainability of Writ Petitions:
The court emphasized that when an effective and alternative remedy is available under the statutory framework, writ petitions should not be entertained. The court cited several Supreme Court judgments, reinforcing the principle that litigants must exhaust statutory remedies before invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The court noted that the appellant had an adequate remedy by filing a revision petition before the Joint Commissioner (CT), Chennai (Central), and should not bypass this statutory remedy.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the writ appeals, affirming the decision of the writ court that directed the appellant to avail the alternative remedy provided under the statute. The court granted the appellant fifteen days from the receipt of the order to file revision petitions before the Joint Commissioner (CT), Chennai (Central). The court reiterated that the existence of an alternative remedy is a self-imposed limitation on the exercise of writ jurisdiction, especially in matters involving tax disputes.