9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (8) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med has not been shown to relate to inter-State sales for the following reasons. There is no prior contract of sale between the assessee and the out-of-State purchaser. That the assessee has not shown to have met the incidental charges for the movement of the goods from this State to the out-of-State purchaser. The assessee himself has not consigned the goods as a result of the prior contract of sale and the goods were delivered only at the assessee's place of business to outside dealers. The non-resident buyers or their representatives had come to the place of the business of the assessee, effected purchase either in cash or credit and moved the goods themselves and the buyers or their agents have signed the bills in token of their having taken delivery of the goods. Though the sale bills in the name of the out-of-State buyers and also the obtaining of C forms are not the deciding factors, this will not convert what was local sale to inter-State sale. The assessee preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against that portion of the order of assessment which rejected the assessee's claim for exemption in respect of Rs. 6,86,230.36 said to represent the inter-St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terState sales, and therefore, the assessees were not entitled to exemption on the said turnovers. The Board of Revenue has given the following three reasons as to why the turnover should be taken to relate to local sales: (1) That immediately after the assessments, the assessees had taken the assessments to the High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 1721 and 1725 of 1974. Though the said writ petitions were dismissed at the stage of admission, the court actually went into the merits and sustained the order of the assessing authority on merits. (2) That the assessees themselves have given signed statements before the assessing authority admitting the transactions to be local sales and stating that they have no objection to be taxed under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act in respect of the disputed turnover. (3) That in any event, the transactions covering the turnover in question have not been shown to have been inter-State sales. The reasoning given by the Board of Revenue has been challenged by the appellants in these two appeals. As regards the first reason given by the Board of Revenue, the learned counsel for the appellants contends that the filing of writ petitions against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing the writ petitions that on the materials placed before the assessing authority his conclusion that the transactions were not inter-State sales is correct has to be given due weight by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or by the Board of Revenue. Though the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not take into account the decision of this Court in the assessees' Writ Petitions Nos. 1721 and 1725 of 1974 in respect of the same assessment years, the Board of Revenue felt that the appellate authority should not have gone behind the order of the High Court which was given on merits. We are of the opinion, that the issue taken by the Board of Revenue that the matter is concluded by this Court in the two writ petitions as the assessees have not filed any additional materials to hold that the transactions were inter-State sales, and the said decision of this Court has to prevail is right. Coming to the second contention relating to the statements given by the assessees before the assessing authority, which have been extracted in the Board's order, the assessees' contention before the Board of Revenue was that they were not aware as to who gave those statements, without taking care t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods from this State to the buyers' State is not in pursuance of or as incident of the contract of sale. As regards the third reason given by the Board, the learned counsel for the appellants contends that in this case the affidavits from the out-of-State buyers and the C forms issued would clearly indicate that the sales were inter-State sales. But, that if the goods were delivered to the buyers and they transported the goods on their responsibility some times in the lorries arranged by the assessees and some times in the lorries arranged by the buyers themselves, as evidenced by the statements given by the assessees, the transactions can be called as purely local sales. It appears that the price agreed to between the parties was ex-godown price and the goods were delivered at the place of the sellers and the assessees were not concerned as to what happened to the goods afterwards. Admittedly, there is no written contract of sale from which the intention and the bargain between the parties could be gathered and all the orders are said to have been placed by the buyers over the phone and the goods are claimed to have been sent by the assessees to the buyers' place of business w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nominees that should have arranged for the transport of the goods after taking actual delivery at the factory. Accordingly, such sales should be deemed to have been completed by actual delivery within the State by the sellers to the buyers or their nominees and the subsequent movement of the goods could not be taken to be in pursuance of or incidental to the contract of sale which had already been completed by actual delivery to the buyers or to their nominees within the State of Tamil Nadu." We are of the view that the facts in this case attract the decision in Asbestos Cement Limited v. Government of Tamil Nadu [1972] 30 STC 251. The learned counsel for the appellants would, however, rely on the decision of this Court in State of Madras v. Bramhappa Tavanappanavar (Mysore) Private Ltd. [1974] 33 STC 601. In that case also, the assessee claimed exemption in respect of certain transactions which were alleged to be inter-State, but he did not produce the relevant contracts of sale to prove that the contracts were for inter-State sales. But the invoices and other correspondence produced by the assessee were taken to indicate that the goods should have been transported by ship from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven before the assessing authority that it is the buyers who came to this State, purchased the goods and then moved the goods at their risk and cost indicate that the transaction can only be intra-State sales and not inter-State sales. The learned counsel for the assessees very strongly urges that this is a case in which the assessees should be given an opportunity to explain the circumstances under which the said statements had been given before the assessing authority to establish that the statements having been obtained under coercion and misrepresentation, they cannot be relied on. We do not, however, think that this is a fit case for giving a further opportunity to the assessees to get over the statements given by them before the assessing authority. As a matter of fact, the Board of Revenue, even in the show cause notice, specifically asked the assessees to explain as regards the admissions contained in the statements given by them and the assessees did not question the genuineness of the statements in the objections filed by them. There was a personal hearing before the Board of Revenue and even at that time the genuineness of the statements has not been attacked on the gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
