9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (8) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Tax Act. There is no dispute now that the sales in question were in the course of inter-State sale. The assessee claimed that since the sales of these goods are exempted under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, under section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act they are also exempted from the levy of Central sales tax. The ground on which the assessee now claims exemption is that by section 10 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act (28 of 1969) sales of goods in the course of inter-State trade and commerce effected during the period between 10th November, 1964, and 9th June, 1969, are exempted from the liability to pay Central sales tax if the conditions referred to in that section are complied with. This court, considering the provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The result therefore is exemption granted in respect of the sale of the goods in question by the local law would also be available for the Central sales tax assessment. Thus both the conditions referred to in section 10 are complied with. The learned counsel for the revenue contended that only if the assessee had not collected tax on the ground that such tax could not have been levied or collected in respect of such sale, he would be entitled to the exemption. He further contended that whatever may be the view of the other courts even after the decision in State of Mysore v. Yaddalam Lakshminarasimhiah[1965] 16 S.T.C. 231 (S.C.). and State of Kerala v. Pothan Joseph [1970] 25 S.T.C. 147 (S.C.)., this court took the view that an exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... took the view that in view of the omission of the exemption provision with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1959, excise duty could never be deemed to have been exempted from inclusion in the taxable turnover and that, therefore, no question of its exemption under the Central Sales Tax Act arose. If there was no exemption under section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act then section 10 is not applicable at all. These two decisions therefore have no application to the present case. We accordingly hold that in view of the provision contained in section 10 of Central Act 28 of 1969, the respondent-assessee is entitled to exclude the disputed turnover from the taxable turnover. These petitions accordingly fail and are dismissed with costs. Coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
