9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (12) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t March, 1964, the respondents were assessed to inter-State sales tax on a turnover of Rs. 4,53,353, and transactions which were not sales, leave aside inter-State sales, were determined at Rs. 99,640. In respect of this amount of Rs. 99,640, the Sales Tax Officer I, B Ward, Unit III, Bombay, forfeited therefrom a sum of Rs. 19,928, contending that the same had been collected by the respondents by way of sales tax on the said transactions of the aggregate value of Rs. 99,640, which transactions were, as held by him, not sales. The matter ultimately came before the Sales Tax Tribunal in a second appeal filed by the respondents. The Tribunal held that if the transactions in question of the aggregate value of Rs. 99,640 were not sales, there c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncerned, in Khemka Co. (Agencies) Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra[1975] 35 S.T.C. 571 (S.C.)., the Supreme Court has held that the assessing authorities under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, have no power to forfeit any amount collected in contravention of the provisions of section 9A of the said Act or to impose any penalty in respect thereof in view of the fact that no express provisions in that behalf have been made in the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the provisions of a State Sales Tax Act providing for such power of forfeiture or levy of penalty are not attracted to such a case. The four questions which the petitioner by his application initially wanted this court to direct the Tribunal to refer to this court are as follows ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Sales Tax Act, 1956, as amended by the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1969?" In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above, Mr. Desai on behalf of the petitioner has stated that he does not press before us questions Nos. (1), (3) and (4) but was confining this application only to question No. (2) set out above. It was not urged before us that this question was wrongly decided, but what was urged was that it was not necessary for the Tribunal to give a finding that the collection of Central sales tax on the said transactions of the aggregate value of Rs. 99,640, which were admittedly not sales, did not amount to contravention of section 9A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the Tribunal's finding on this po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s was that assuming the provisions of the said section 9A were contravened, the Sales Tax Officer had no power to forfeit any amount, which, according to him, was collected by way of sales tax. Section 9A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, in clear terms talks of the amount by way of tax under the said Act collected by a registered dealer "in respect of any sale by him of goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce". It does not talk of any amount collected by way of tax in respect of any purported sale or any transaction which is a purported sale. If there is no sale by one man to another, the question of collecting any tax on it either rightfully or wrongfully under the said Act does not and cannot arise. We are also unable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
