9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (2) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titution of India for the issuance of writs of prohibition directing the respondent to forbear from proceeding with the assessments under the Act. In the common counter filed on behalf of the respondent, it is averred that the action of the assessing authority in issuing the impugned show cause notices proposing to levy sales tax on the turnovers of jaggery effected by the petitioners is valid and justified and the petitioners in order to obtain the exemption claimed by them, must prove that their sales are not first sales within the State and that their claim cannot be allowed unless they satisfy the conditions laid down under rule 45(3)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules (hereinafter called the Rules) and the mere allegation that they have purchased jaggery from ryots and therefore the sales effected by them are second sales within the State would not entitle them to claim the exemption unless they produce cash memoranda or bills indicating that the ryots have either paid the tax on such sales of jaggery or would pay the tax payable on such transactions by them. The principal contention of Sri P. Rama Rao, the learned counsel appearing for some of the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alone is taxable. The present rate that governs the first sale of jaggery is 6 paise in a rupee. As jaggery is shown in the First Schedule as item 77, the second or third sales of the same jaggery, which was subjected to sales tax on the first sale, is not liable to sales tax. The dealers in jaggery claimed that they have purchased the jaggery from agriculturists, who had converted sugarcane grown by them into the same and, therefore, the sales of the same jaggery effected by them in their turn to dealers within the State are not exigible to sales tax. The sales tax authorities insisted upon the production of the bills or cash memoranda containing the certificate required under rule 45(3)(b) regarding payment of tax in respect of first sale of jaggery liable to single point tax within the State and informed the petitioner-dealers that without the production of such data, the sales by them would be treated as first sales within the State making them liable to pay sales tax thereon. It is well-settled that whoever seeks to claim exemption from taxation has to prove that his or her case would fall within the provisions of any section of the Act or any rule made thereunder making s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e entitled to claim exemption from sales tax without proving any further fact in respect of the sales of the same jaggery made by him in his turn to any other dealer in the State. Hence, even if he fails or omits to produce the bill or cash memorandum or the certificate pertaining to the first sale of jaggery, he must succeed and the assessing authority is not empowered to reject his claim on the sole ground that no such bill or cash memorandum or certificate has been produced. It is not open to the assessing authority, as referred to earlier, to reject any other evidence adduced by a dealer in support of his claim that the jaggery which is sold by him to another dealer was purchased by him from a ryot or a dealer within the State. The sales tax authorities seek the aid of rule 45(3)(b) in support of their stand that the bill or cash memorandum accompanied by a certificate regarding payment of tax in respect of the first sale of jaggery must be produced by the dealer. Rule 45(1) requires every dealer whose total turnover is less than Rs. 40,000 in a year to keep and maintain a true and correct account showing particulars specified in clauses (i) to (iii) thereof. Rule 45(2) makes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elevant provisions of the Act, I am satisfied that the mere failure or omission on the part of the dealer to produce the bill or cash memorandum accompanied with the certificate as required by rule 45(3)(b) would not ipso facto entitle the assessing authority to include such turnover in the assessment and levy tax thereon without affording a fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee-dealer to prove his case by adducing any other evidence-oral or documentary. There may be cases of sale of jaggery by a ryot or agriculturist whose turnover is less than Rs. 10,000 in a year and who did not maintain any account. Such ryot or agriculturist might not have issued a bill or cash memorandum or the certificate as required by rule 45(3)(b) evidencing the first sale of the jaggery in question. In such cases, it is incumbent on the assessing authority to afford a reasonable opportunity to the dealer to establish his case by adducing any other evidence. The assessing authority may examine the ryots from whom the jaggery was purchased by the dealer if their correct addresses or particulars are furnished, as the assessing authority has got ample power and jurisdiction to summon for them and e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
