TMI Blog1968 (9) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngle point purchase tax is leviable under section 5(3)(b) of the Act. The seventh item of that Schedule, which refers to arecanut, states that such tax is payable only at the point of purchase by the first or earliest of successive dealers in the State liable to tax under the Act. In The State of Mysore v. Lakshminarasimhiah Setty Sons[1965] 16 S.T.C. 231., the enunciation made by the Supreme Court was that under the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, as it then stood, sales tax was payable under the Central Sales Tax Act in respect of inter-State sales only if the sale had taken place inside the State, sales tax would have been payable under the Sales Tax Act of the State. This conclusion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e taxed under the Central Sales Tax Act. The Supreme Court which accepted this contention made the enunciation that in respect of an inter-State sale, tax under the Central Sales Tax Act is payable only by a dealer who would have been liable under the State Sales Tax Act to pay the tax if the transaction had taken place inside the State. On the basis of this pronouncement, the petitioners in the cases before us sought rectification of their assessments under the Central Sales Tax Act, under rule 38 of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules, and those applications were presented within the period of five years prescribed by that rule which admittedly governed the matter. The Commercial Tax Officer dismissed those applications and the prayer in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessments of the petitioners before us relate to periods when the amended sections were operating. Those amendments came into force on 1st October, 1958, and so the relevant statutory provisions of the Central Act which were applicable to the impugned assessments are sections 8 and 9 of that Act as they stand after their amendment. But it is clear that the amendments made to those sections did not change the law stated by the Supreme Court in Lakshminarasimhiah Setty's case[1965] 16 S.T.C. 231. That statement of the law, which was founded more on the provisions of section 9 than on those of section 8, was that sales tax was payable under section 9 in respect of an inter-State transaction only if sales tax would have been payable und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion (2) of that section contained before its amendment, is not to be found in any part of that sub-section after it was altered. But in respect of "levy" and "collection" of tax under the Central Sales Tax Act on an inter-State sale, section 9 in effect remains unchanged. Sub-section (1) of the amended ninth section is in substance similar to the old sub-section. But old sub-section (2) has now become sub-section (3) which however incorporates the same old provisions on assessment, levy and collection. That that is so becomes clear when those sub-sections are read in juxtaposition. Section 9 as it stood before its amendment Section 9 as it stands after its amendment (which came into force on 1st October, 1958). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sales tax law of the appropriate State shall, on behalf of the Government of India and subject to any rules made under this Act, assess, collect and enforce payment of any tax, including any penalty, payable by a dealer under this Act in the same manner as the tax on the sale or purchase of goods under the general sales tax law of the State is assessed, paid and collected; and for this purpose they may exercise all or any of the powers they have under the general sales tax law of the State; and the provisions of such law, including provisions relating to returns, appeals, reviews, revisions, references, penalties and compounding of offences, shall apply accordingly. Notwithstanding the difference in language, the importance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|