2021 (7) TMI 1250 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Exemption from tax - sale of Intra-ocular lenses - exempt under the provisions of the TNGST Act or not? - Third Schedule to the TNGST Act read along with Section 8 - HELD THAT - This Court is of the considered opinion that whether the exemption granted is general in nature or certain conditions are impliedly or expressly imposed is the point to be considered. The object of Section 8 of the TNGST Act is to grant exemption in respect of the goods and such exemption is subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government - there is no further classification or condition is required in respect of the grant of exemption. The Third Schedule to the TNGST Act unambiguously stipulates goods exempted from tax by Section 8 . It commences the following goods produced or manufactured in India as described in Column (3) against the relevant heading in column (1) of the First Schedule to the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance Act, 1957) (Central Act 58 of 1957) . Therefore, Third Schedule stipulates goods exempted from tax. Intra-ocular lenses - HELD THAT - Part-B is relevant. Item No.2 of Part-B denotes aids for physically disadvantaged persons as notified by the Government . Item No.2 did not prescribe any goods within the meaning of Section 8 of the TNGST Act. Section 8 contemplates 'goods specified in the Third Schedule'. However, Item No.2 of Part-B did not prescribe any goods. Contrarily, the said Item states that such goods, which all are aids for physically disadvantaged persons are to be notified by the Government. Therefore, Item No.2 Part-B is a general exemption granted, as far as the aids for physically disadvantaged persons are concerned and what all are the aids which all are exempted were notified by the Government in G.O.No.30 dated 27th March, 2005 - This Court has no doubt with reference to the language adopted in Item No.2 of Part-B of the Third Schedule to the TNGST Act, which contemplates aids for physically disadvantaged person . The aids for physically disadvantaged may be many in numbers. However, such aids notified by the Government alone are exempted under the statute more specifically, Third Schedule. In the present case, five goods are exempted from sale tax. Further, the Third Schedule to the TNGST Act commences by contemplating goods exempted from tax by Section 8 , Therefore, once a particular goods is exempted from tax by Section 8, then such goods are to be treated as generally exempted, unless there is an expressed restriction or condition attached to the exemption clause. In the present case, there is no such restriction or condition contemplated in Item No.2 of Part-B of the Third Schedule. Item No.2 generally states 'aids for physically disadvantaged persons as notified by the Government'. Thus, the Government notified five goods which all are exempted and those five goods are to be exempted generally and therefore, the condition now suggested by the Government in their counter is presumptive and not supported with the provisions of the TNGST Act. Certain implied conditions may be possible only on certain circumstances - In the present case, the inference regarding any such implied condition cannot be drawn, as the language employed in Item No.2 of Part-B of the Third Schedule is unambiguous. It states 'aids for physically disadvantaged persons' and not all the aids for physically disadvantaged persons are exempted. In the absence of any specific condition to that effect, the respondents cannot presume or assume and impose sale tax in respect of the Intra-ocular lenses irrespective of the fact whether it is sold either to the dealer, hospital or to the Doctor or otherwise. This Court is of an opinion that the concept of conditional exemption as contemplated by the respondents is not traceable in any of the provisions of the TNGST Act, nor in the notification. Once the goods are exempted under the TNGST Act, then it is to be exempted under the CST Act also in view of Section 8 of the CST Act - This being the constructive interpretation to be adopted in respect of such exemption, which all are granted for the benefit of the group of people in general, this Court is of the opinion that if any such presumptive condition is accepted, the same will cause inconvenience to the physically disadvantaged persons and thus, the case of the respondents is to be rejected. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the sale of Intra-ocular lenses is exempted from tax under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act (TNGST Act).
2. The applicability of general versus conditional exemptions under the TNGST Act.
3. The extension of state law exemptions to inter-State sales under the Central Sales Tax Act (CST Act).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Exemption of Intra-ocular Lenses from Tax under TNGST Act:
The primary dispute is whether the sale of Intra-ocular lenses is exempted from tax under the TNGST Act. The petitioners, registered dealers under the TNGST Act, TNVAT Act, and CST Act, argue that Intra-ocular lenses are included under "aids for physically disadvantaged persons" as notified by the Government in G.O.No.30, dated 27th March 2002. This notification includes Intra-ocular lenses in Serial No.4, thereby exempting them from sales tax. The petitioners contend that the exemption is general and unconditional, and the respondents' demand for sales tax is contrary to this exemption.

2. General vs. Conditional Exemptions:
The petitioners argue that Section 8 of the TNGST Act, which provides for exemptions, does not impose any conditions or restrictions on the exemption granted to Intra-ocular lenses. They emphasize that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes issued clarifications in 2011 stating that the sale of Intra-ocular lenses is generally exempted, and thus, any imposition of sales tax by subordinate authorities is in violation of this clarification.

The respondents, however, assert that the exemption is conditional, arguing that Item No.2 of Part-B of the Third Schedule to the TNGST Act specifies "aids for physically disadvantaged persons as notified by the Government." They contend that the exemption applies only if the Intra-ocular lenses are sold directly to physically disadvantaged persons, not through dealers or hospitals unless proof is provided that the lenses are ultimately sold to patients.

The Court, upon examining the language of Item No.2 of Part-B and Section 8 of the TNGST Act, concludes that the exemption is general. The Court notes that the Third Schedule stipulates "goods exempted from tax by Section 8" and does not prescribe any conditions or restrictions for the exemption of Intra-ocular lenses. Therefore, the Court rejects the respondents' contention that the exemption is conditional and holds that the exemption is general and applies to all sales of Intra-ocular lenses, whether to dealers, hospitals, or directly to patients.

3. Extension of State Law Exemptions to Inter-State Sales under CST Act:
The petitioners argue that the general exemption granted under the TNGST Act should extend to inter-State sales under the CST Act. Section 8 of the CST Act stipulates that the tax rate for inter-State sales should be the lower of 3% or the rate applicable under the State Sales Tax law. The petitioners contend that since Intra-ocular lenses are exempted under the TNGST Act, they should also be exempted from inter-State sales tax under the CST Act.

The Court agrees with this interpretation, noting that the CST Act unambiguously states that exemptions granted by State law should apply to inter-State sales. Therefore, the Court holds that the sale of Intra-ocular lenses to other States is also exempt from sales tax under the CST Act.

Conclusion:
The Court concludes that the sale of Intra-ocular lenses is generally exempted from sales tax under the TNGST Act, without any conditions or restrictions. This exemption extends to inter-State sales under the CST Act. The Court quashes all impugned orders demanding sales tax from the petitioners and allows the writ petitions.