2020 (1) TMI 415 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Re-opening of concluded Assessment - Fixation of tax rate at 16% against 10% - Writ court while deciding issue relating to issuance of show cause notice to re-open assessment held that revenue was not justified in reopening assessment as assessments were complete and tax was paid by assessee - HELD THAT - The issue is squarely is covered in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER VERSUS M/S. SUNDEK INDIA LTD. 2015 (9) TMI 45 - MADRAS HIGH COURT where it was held that the Present court fully in agreement with holding that assessments in respect of respondent / assessee having been completed pursuant to order passed by Special Tribunal and tax at rate of 10% was also collected, Revenue was not justified in demanding tax at 16% by seeking to reopen concluded assessments by issuing clarification. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of entry in Central Excise Tariff under TNGST Act
Relevance of decisions under Central Excise Act in interpreting state taxation laws
Applicability of tax clarifications prospectively
Benefit of ambiguity in tax rate to be extended to assessees

Interpretation of entry in Central Excise Tariff under TNGST Act:
The case involved a dispute over the interpretation of an entry in the Central Excise Tariff under the TNGST Act. The court referred to a previous decision where a similar issue was considered with respect to 'Pesticides' and 'Insecticides,' highlighting the importance of legislative intent in classification for taxation purposes. The court also cited a Bombay High Court decision emphasizing that decisions under the Central Excise Act may not always be relevant in interpreting state taxation laws. Furthermore, the court noted a Division Bench decision that interpreted the description of paper under the TNGST Act to be comprehensive, covering various types of paper.

Relevance of decisions under Central Excise Act in interpreting state taxation laws:
The court discussed the relevance of decisions rendered under the Central Excise Act in interpreting state taxation laws. It was emphasized that clarifications issued in tax matters should typically apply prospectively to avoid causing hardship to taxpayers. The court cited various Supreme Court decisions to support this principle, highlighting the need to extend the benefit of any ambiguity in tax rates to the assessees rather than the Revenue.

Applicability of tax clarifications prospectively:
The judgment underscored the principle that clarifications issued in tax matters should have prospective application to prevent undue hardship to taxpayers. The court referenced several Supreme Court decisions to support this stance, emphasizing that any ambiguity in tax rates should benefit the assessees rather than the Revenue.

Benefit of ambiguity in tax rate to be extended to assessees:
The court concluded that any ambiguity regarding the rate of tax payable for paper-based decorative laminated sheets should be resolved in favor of the assessees. This decision was based on the premise that uncertainties in tax matters should not disadvantage taxpayers, as highlighted in various Supreme Court judgments. Consequently, the writ petitions were allowed, and the Writ Appeal was dismissed on the same terms, with no costs imposed.