1964 (10) TMI 45 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether the company complied with the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 and the Rules in the present case? Held that - Appeal dismissed. The contention that the charging section is incomplete without the prescription of the proper Form for the certificate of registration need not detain us. We have already shown that the old Form must be deemed to be modified and even otherwise the section and the Rules did not depend on the new Form. They were complete and effective. The registration certificate was only the evidence that the company was registered dealer for purposes of certain commodities to be used in manufacture, one of them being cotton. The omission to prescribe the new Form or to issue it did not render section 5 and the Rules ineffective.

Issues Involved:
1. Inclusion of unginned cotton in taxable turnover.
2. Exemption claim for oil-seeds.
3. Compliance with amended Section 5(2)(a)(ii) and related rules.
4. Validity of the charging section (Section 5) post-amendment.
5. Conflict with Central Sales Tax Act provisions.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Inclusion of Unginned Cotton in Taxable Turnover:
The appellant, a company, filed a return showing a gross turnover of Rs. 40,89,954.24 and a taxable turnover of Rs. 1,30,296.81 for the year 1959-60. The company deducted Rs. 10,85,842.74 for unginned cotton purchased under a registration certificate dated January 3, 1956. This deduction was disallowed by the Assessing Authority, Patiala District. The High Court upheld this disallowance, leading to the present appeal.

2. Exemption Claim for Oil-Seeds:
The company also claimed an exemption for purchases of oil-seeds amounting to Rs. 4,47,437.33 under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. However, this claim was abandoned during the hearing, and thus no further reference was made to this issue.

3. Compliance with Amended Section 5(2)(a)(ii) and Related Rules:
The Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, was amended by Punjab Act 13 of 1959. Section 5(2)(a)(ii) was further amended to include the words "in the State of Punjab." Rule 26 and Form S.T. XXII were also amended to reflect this change. However, the company's registration certificate was not updated to include this condition. Despite this, the court held that the company must comply with the amended Act and Rules, and the old registration certificate should be deemed implicitly modified. The company admitted that the ginned cotton was sent to Uttar Pradesh for manufacturing cloth, thus failing to meet the requirement that the goods be manufactured "in the State of Punjab" for sale.

4. Validity of the Charging Section (Section 5) Post-Amendment:
The company argued that the charging section (Section 5) was incomplete without the updated registration certificate form. The court rejected this argument, stating that the old form should be deemed modified to align with the amended section and rules. The omission to prescribe the new form did not render Section 5 and the rules ineffective.

5. Conflict with Central Sales Tax Act Provisions:
The company contended that Section 5(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, which prescribes a maximum tax rate of 4 nP. per rupee, conflicted with Sections 14 and 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, which set a maximum tax rate of 2%. The court held that Article 286(3) of the Constitution modifies state laws to comply with Central legislation, and the second proviso to Section 5(1) was added out of abundant caution. Therefore, the state law would stand modified to comply with the Central Sales Tax Act.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the disallowance of the deduction for unginned cotton and rejecting all other contentions raised by the company. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

← Previous Next →