9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (10) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017.39 for the period January to March, 1971, and Rs. 5,552.71 for the period April to June, 1971, and the two writ petitions are filed for the issue of writ of mandamus forbearing the respondent from enforcing the said notices. The contentions raised in all the writ petitions are identical and, therefore, the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. The petitioners are dealers in coconut. They purchase coconuts within the State and export them to places outside the State. Under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (in this judgment referred to as the State Act), the sales tax is payable by a dealer at 3 per cent. on the turnover at the point of the last purchase in regard to coconuts. The petitioners have opted for assessment under rule 17 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules made under the State Act and have been submitting monthly returns in form A-2 prescribed by the Rules and have been paying tax every month on the turnover shown in those returns. In regard to sales made by them in the course of inter-State trade they are liable to pay Central sales tax, but under section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act (in this judgment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the provisions of sub-section (2) in the State from which the movement of the goods commenced. Under subsection (2), subject to the other provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, the authorities for the time being empowered to assess, reassess, collect and enforce payment of any tax under the general sales tax law of the appropriate State shall, on behalf of the Government of India, assess, reassess, collect and enforce payment of tax, as if the tax is a tax payable under the sales tax law of the State. For this purpose they may exercise all or any of the powers they have under the general sales tax law of the State. Section 15, which has already been referred to, provides that in respect of declared goods every sales tax law of a State shall be subject to the following restrictions and conditions, namely: (a) the tax payable under the law in respect of any sale or purchase of such goods inside the State shall not exceed three per cent. of the sale or purchase price thereof, and such tax shall not be levied at more than one stage; (b) where a tax has been levied under that law in respect of the sale or purchase inside the State of any declared goods and such go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vied under the State Act in respect of declared goods and such goods are sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce the tax so levied shall be refunded; the right to refund of the State tax arises the moment the goods are sold in the course of interState trade or commerce and it is not conditional upon the petitioners paying the Central tax due on such inter-State sales. He relies, in this connection, on the decision in Rafeeq Ahmed Co. v. State of A.P.[1969] 24 S.T.C. 430 at p. 444., where it is observed that the right to refund arises the moment the goods purchased are sold in the course of inter-State trade and there is no warrant for the imposition of any further condition for getting a refund of the tax levied under the State Act. He also drew our attention to the decision of the Mysore High Court in Munshi Abdul Rahiman Bros. v. Commercial Tax Officer[1967] 20 S.T.C. 89., where rule 39-A of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules, imposing a condition that the assessee before claiming refund must have paid tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, was struck down. It was observed that the actual payment of tax under the Central Sales Tax Act is not specifically mentioned in sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... annot be made to depend upon the right to obtain a refund under the State Act. We are, therefore, satisfied that the petitioners are not entitled to ask this court for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent from forbearing from the collection of Central sales tax until their application for refund of the State tax paid by them is heard and disposed of. The respondent has, however, gone further and urged that the application for refund can be decided only after the assessment proceedings under the State law are completed. It is urged that the assessment is on the turnover of the year and there cannot be a piece-meal refund with respect to each monthly turnover. Even though the petitioners are submitting monthly returns and paying the taxes due under the State law along with the returns and provisional assessments are made from time to time, the final assessment will be only made at the end of the year under rule 17, sub-rule (5). It is, therefore, contended that the application for refund of State tax can be considered only at the time the final assessment under the State law is completed after the end of the assessment year. On the other hand, it is the contenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
