9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 747 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxLevy of tax on the purchase turnover of goods under Section 3 (4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act - Held that - since they had effected only export sales of finished goods by using the goods purchased against Form XVII declarations and have not transferred the goods to other state agent or to their own branch in other state in order to attract levy u/s 3 (4) of the Act. - Following decision of Tube Investment of India Limited Vs State of Tamil Nadu (2010 (10) TMI 938 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) - No substantial question of law arises for consideration in these revisions - Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 3(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act regarding liability on export sales. 2. Application of the principle of situs for interpreting the provision. 3. Distinction between intrastate sale and export sale. 4. Constitutionality of levy under Section 3(4) in the context of export sales. 5. Inclusion of export sales within the ambit of Section 3(4). 6. Analysis of Sections 3(3) and 3(4) as charging provisions. 7. Purpose of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act in relation to sales or purchases within the state. Analysis: The High Court of Madras heard revisions filed by the Department challenging an order by the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, a manufacturer of steel and industrial goods, based on the judgment in Tube Investment of India Limited Vs State of Tamil Nadu. The Tribunal held that no liability under Section 3(4) of the Act arises for the dealer-appellants who only engaged in export sales of finished goods using goods purchased against Form XVII declarations. The Revenue appealed to the High Court, raising several substantial questions of law for consideration. The substantial questions of law framed for consideration included the interpretation of Section 3(4) in the context of export sales, the application of the principle of situs, the distinction between intrastate and export sales, the constitutionality of the levy under Section 3(4) concerning export sales, and the inclusion of export sales within the scope of Section 3(4). The Court noted that the main issue in both appeals was the liability to tax under Section 3(4) of the Act. The Government Advocate (Taxes) conceded that previous judgments by the Court, specifically in Tube Investment of India Ltd. cases, had already addressed the issue of whether export sales fall under the purview of Section 3(4). The Court was informed that the position taken in Tube Investments case was reiterated in subsequent decisions by the Bench. Consequently, the Court found that the cases at hand were covered by the precedent set in Tube Investment of India Ltd. cases and subsequent decisions, leading to the dismissal of the tax case revisions. In conclusion, the Court determined that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in the revisions based on the established precedent. The Court emphasized the applicability of previous judgments in Tube Investment of India Ltd. cases to the present matters, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the revisions.
|
