2015 (12) TMI 576 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Liability of turn over tax - Held that - Sales tax revision petition regarding turn over tax is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle, Udaipur Vs. M/s H.E.G. Limited, Rishav Textiles, Rishavdev, Udaipur wherein it was held that, the assessing authority was not justified in imposing or computing the exemption fee under the notification dtd. 28.6.2003 on the basis of annual gross turnover including therein the turnover representing branch transfers, consignment transfers, interstate sales or export sale made by the assessee during the relevant year. - Following the same - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Sales Tax Revision Petition under Section 86 of Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 regarding turn over tax for assessment year 2000-2001.

Analysis:
The High Court of Rajasthan addressed the Sales Tax Revision Petition filed by the Revenue against the order dated 28.10.2005 by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer. The case involved the liability of turn over tax for the assessment year 2000-2001, where a demand of Rs. 2,453/- was raised by the Assessing Authority. The assessee appealed the order, leading to a series of appeals and dismissals by the Appellate Authority and the Tax Board, culminating in the present revision petition by the Revenue.

The Court noted that the issue in the present case regarding turn over tax was covered by a previous decision involving Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle, Udaipur Vs. M/s H.E.G. Limited, Rishav Textiles, Rishavdev, Udaipur. The Court quoted the findings from the previous case, emphasizing the definitions of "turnover" and "taxable turnover" as provided in Section 2(44) and 2(42) of the Act. It highlighted the legislative competence of the State to impose tax within the defined parameters of the Constitution of India, specifically mentioning Articles 269, 286, and 265. The Court clarified that the power to exempt goods or transactions under Section 15 of the Act was limited by the scope of the Act itself, emphasizing that what cannot be taxed cannot be exempted.

Regarding the computation of exemption fee under a specific notification, the Court ruled in favor of the respondent-assessee, stating that the assessing authority was not justified in including turnover components like branch transfers, export sales, and interstate sales in the annual gross turnover for computing exemption fee. The Court directed the assessing authority to recompute the exemption fee excluding these components and to refund any excess fees collected from the respondent-assessee with interest. Additionally, the Court dismissed the Revenue's revision petitions concerning the levy of concessional tax rate on diesel and the issue of packing material, leaving the latter open for decision by the assessing authority.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the present revision petition by the Revenue, with no costs imposed. The Court ordered the distribution of the order copy to the Tax Board and the concerned parties promptly.