9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1172 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRevision of assessment of assessment - absence of F-forms - benefits of stock transfer after the amendment made to Section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - Held that - relaince placed on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in India Agencies (Regd.) v. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 2004 (12) TMI 372 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA which categorically found that concessional tax on C-Form sales, cannot be allowed on production of photostat copy of the counterfoil. It cannot be said to be strict or even substantial compliance of Rule 12(3) - there is no reason to entertain the revision since no question of law arises from the impugned order - revision dismissed.
Issues:
Challenge to assessment under Kerala General Sales Tax Act for the year 2002-2003; Non-production of F-Form for a specific amount leading to local sales assessment; Interpretation of Section 6A of Central Sales Tax Act regarding F-Form requirement; Applicability of Rule 12(2) of Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules for loss of F-Forms; Time gap in production of F-Forms and obligation to obtain duplicates; Consent of assessee to assessment at a higher rate under Section 17D; Complaint before Puducherry Police regarding lost F-Forms; Requirement of additional evidence in absence of F-Forms; Comparison with precedent allowing photocopies of forms in exceptional circumstances. Analysis: The petitioner, an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, contested the assessment for the year 2002-2003 primarily focusing on the issue of non-production of F-Form for a specific amount, resulting in the balance being treated as local sales and subjected to tax. The requirement of F-Forms for stock transfer benefits was highlighted, emphasizing the necessity post the amendment to Section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, where failure to furnish such declaration deems the movement of goods as a sale. Regarding the applicability of Rule 12(2) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules for loss of F-Forms, the court dismissed its relevance in this case. The argument that an indemnity bond was produced before the assessing officer did not hold weight as Section 6A mandates F-Forms for stock transfer evidence, and the absence thereof leads to deeming the transaction as a sale within the State. The court also addressed the time gap in F-Form production, emphasizing the need for obtaining duplicates or certificates in case of loss, and the obligation to provide additional evidence to prove the genuineness of stock transactions. The consent of the assessee to assessment at a higher rate under Section 17D was highlighted, noting that raising contentions post-consent was not acceptable. Furthermore, the complaint before the Puducherry Police regarding lost F-Forms was examined, with the court rejecting the argument due to the delayed filing of the complaint. The requirement for additional evidence in the absence of F-Forms was stressed, with reference to a precedent allowing photocopies of forms in exceptional circumstances, which was deemed inapplicable here due to negligence and lack of diligence by the petitioner. In conclusion, the court dismissed the revision as no legal question arose from the impugned order, citing precedents that strict compliance with form submission requirements was necessary. The revision was thus dismissed, with costs to be borne by the parties.
|
