9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (1) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... represented to the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer that the goods were given delivery to them at Trichur, in the Travancore-Cochin area by their agent and that they had already been assessed to sales tax on this amount by the Sales Tax Authorities of the Travancore-Cochin State. They also produced a copy of the assessment order of the Sales Tax Officer, Second Circle, Quilon. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer was of opinion that the turnover was assessable to tax under the Madras General Sales Tax Act and issued notice to the petitioners proposing to assess them on the whole turnover. At this stage the assessees and their purchasing agent, C.V. Francis, filed a statement that cashew-nuts worth Rs. 6,40,561-9-0 were purchased from the erstwhil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transactions could not be taxed over again by the Sales Tax Authorities in Perinthalmanna. This argument did not find favour with the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed this contention with the observation that the fact that the Travancore-Cochin State Sales Tax Authorities have wrongly assessed the petitioners to tax in respect of the turnover was no reason why they should not be assessed to tax under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The Tribunal also observed that if there was double taxation the remedy of the petitioners was to get the assessment made by the Travancore-Cochin State Authorities revised. In that view the Tribunal confirmed the order of the Taxing Authorities and dismissed the appeal. 4.. Aggrieved by the said order the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Pleader. The learned Government Pleader contends before us that there is no finding either in the assessment order of the Sales Tax Officer, Quilon, or in the assessment order of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Perinthalmanna, or the Commercial Tax Officer, Palghat, to the effect that the purchases which are the subject-matter of these proceedings have been included in the assessment order of the Sales Tax Officer, Quilon. Though there is no definite finding to this effect in the assessment orders above-mentioned, the proceedings before the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Perinthalmanna, the Commercial Tax Officer, Palghat, and also before the Appellate Tribunal went on the assumption that these transactions have been included in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s such as Counties and Municipal Corporations to the same extent as they are against individuals and private corporations." In this connection the learned Government Pleader also relies on a decision of the Privy Council in Maritime Electric Co., Ltd. v. General Dairies Ltd.A.I.R. 1937 P.C. 114. The head note of this case reads: "In case of a Statute enacted for the benefit of a section of the public, that is, on grounds of public policy, where the Statute imposes a duty of a positive kind not avoidable by the performance of any formality, for the doing of the very act which the party suing seeks to do, it is not open to the opposite party to set up an estoppel to prevent it. This conclusion must follow from the circumstances that an estopp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how and at whose instance these transactions came to be included in the Quilon assessment. In the above circumstances we are inclined to hold that principles of estoppel have no application to the present case. 8.. The next argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the State, having assessed the petitioners through their agent, the Quilon Sales Tax Officer on the basis that these transactions took place in the Travancore-Cochin area, cannot now through their another agent, the Perinthalmanna Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, assess the same transactions on another basis, that they took place in the Malabar area. In support of this contention he invited our attention to several decisions under the Income-tax Act. We shall ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not contend that the propositions laid down by the above decisions are not correct. His argument, on the other hand, is that the assessment in Quilon was made under the Travancore-Cochin Sales Tax Act and the present assessment by the Perinthalmanna officer has been made under a different Act, the Madras General Sales Tax Act. According to him the Perinthalmanna Sales Tax Officer was entitled, under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, to impose a tax on the sales which took place within the Malabar area and the petitioners were liable to pay the same irrespective of the fact that the petitioners have already been assessed on the same transactions by the Quilon Sales Tax Officer under another law. All the cases cited by the learned counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
