2018 (4) TMI 1382 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision of total turnover in assessment order - denial of revision of turnover on the ground that the petitioner has not surrendered the E-Transit pass - Held that - the surrender of E-transit pass is not a sin qua non for establishing that the goods were sold within the State. Since there were several cases arising out of the non surrender of E-Transit pass, the Commissioner has given specific direction to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the first respondent cannot merely go by the directives of his Superior Officer and ignore the circular, which is very specific - this Court is inclined to remit back the matter to the respondents to specifically consider all the documents and verify as to the correctness of the submissions made by the petitioner, without insisting upon the surrender of E-Transit pass. Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Writ petition seeking prohibition on assessing, levying, or collecting sales tax on inter-state sales of iron and steel.
2. Preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ of prohibition.
3. Dispute over surrendering E-Transit pass as a requirement for determining the location of sale of goods.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The petitioner filed a writ petition requesting a prohibition on the assessment of sales tax on inter-state sales of iron and steel. The court noted that the main contention revolved around whether the goods were disposed of within Tamil Nadu. The respondents had previously based their assessment on the non-surrender of the E-Transit pass. However, the court highlighted that the petitioner had submitted detailed objections and relevant records, challenging the assessment order. Despite the petitioner's efforts to provide substantial evidence, the authority solely relied on the non-surrender of the E-Transit pass to maintain the assessment, disregarding the circular issued by the Commissioner regarding the acceptance of other documentary evidence in lieu of the transit pass.

Issue 2:
The learned Government Advocate raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ of prohibition, arguing that it would hinder the authority from exercising its statutory powers. The court acknowledged the objection but emphasized that when facts are admitted, and the authority fails to consider them, a writ of prohibition can be issued. The court highlighted that in this case, the authority disregarded the petitioner's submissions and documents, solely focusing on the non-surrender of the E-Transit pass. The court reiterated that the authority should have considered all the documents and verified the petitioner's submissions without solely relying on the surrender of the E-Transit pass.

Issue 3:
The dispute over the surrender of the E-Transit pass played a crucial role in the judgment. The circular issued by the Commissioner clarified that the surrender of the E-Transit pass is not mandatory to establish the location of the sale of goods. The circular emphasized the acceptance of other reliable documentary evidence to prove the inter-state movement of goods. The court, relying on the circular, directed the first respondent to reconsider the matter, considering all the documents and verifying the correctness of the petitioner's submissions without insisting on the surrender of the E-Transit pass.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition by remitting the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent was instructed to evaluate the petitioner's representations and documents without mandating the surrender of the E-Transit pass, ensuring an independent assessment based on the evidence provided.