9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the purchase orders were transmitted to the Cochin branch is not acceptable as the petitioner has submitted the central excise records to show the delivery of goods after import and the payment of central sales tax at 4% supported by the certificate issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle-II, Commercial Taxes Department, Ernakulam. Those records have not been taken into consideration by the authority. Records have been camouflaged to show that they were inter-State sales from Cochin is also rejected as the authority has not taken pains to state as to which document has been camouflaged and in what manner to show the inter-State sales from Cochin. It is, therefore, clear that all these allegations are mere conjectures and surmises on the part of the authority, without analysing the documents produced by the petitioner and what makes the matter worse is that, there are no reasons recorded as to which of the documents are invalid under law and which of the documents have been camouflaged to show the inter-State sales and how those documents are inadmissible in law. The question of suppression, which is also the reason for levy of penalty, appears t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is seen that the consumers in and around Coimbatore placed orders addressed to the dealers Chennai office and in most of the cases with advance payment by D.D. and in turn they were forwarded to the dealers Coimbatore Depot to monitor the delivery of SKO to the ultimate buyers. Both these orders and demand drafts have finally been handed over to the dealers Coimbatore Depot. Certain purchase orders do not contain the place where from the goods should be supplied. In some cases, there is provision for CST 4% but this will not be the deciding factor for inter-State sale. In some cases both the place and CST 4% were absent. Although in some of the cases, it has been noted that the goods from Cochin it cannot be determinative test to call it as in the course of inter-State purchase. To put it in simple words, the buyer at Coimbatore is concerned with the delivery of SKO at their premises and not concerned whether it comes from Cochin or Coimbatore. 2. Further all the consignments first reached Coimbatore Depot and then only started its journey to the buyers destination. Hence it is clear that the Coimbatore Depot took full custody of the goods before it is delivered to the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mand notices issued accordingly. 4. In the reply dated 10.2.2004, while reiterating the stand that it was a case of inter-State sale of SKO from Cochin to various purchasers in Tamil Nadu, the petitioner relied upon various documents like the purchase orders, central excise documents to show the proof of despatch of goods from Cochin to the purchasers in Tamil Nadu and the documents were annexed to the reply dated 10.2.2004. The petitioner also relied upon a Certificate issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle-II, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam dated 27.1.2004 in support of the plea that the goods in question viz., SKO had already suffered 4% central sales tax at Kerala and therefore the first respondent's claim of local sales is far-fetched. The petitioner had taken pains to enclose all the documents submitted to the authority, as part of the typed-set of papers, and after taking note of the detailed objections and after extracting the entire objections including the case laws relied upon, the Commercial Tax Officer has passed the impugned provisional assessment order overruling the objections and provisionally assessing the total and taxable turnov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is that there was no evidence to show that the purchase orders were transmitted to the Cochin branch. For this, the petitioner has submitted the central excise records to show the delivery of goods after import and the payment of central sales tax at 4% supported by the certificate issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle-II, Commercial Taxes Department, Ernakulam. Those records have not been taken into consideration by the authority. 8. The next finding of the authority is even more unreasonable, that is to say that the records have been camouflaged to show that they were inter-State sales from Cochin. With great reservation, the Court would observe that the authority has not taken pains to state as to which document has been camouflaged and in what manner to show the inter-State sales from Cochin. A finding of this nature, serious enough to allege, should be based on analysis of documents and not merely on conjectures and surmises. There is no analysis of the admitted documents to show that they have been camouflaged in one or other manner. Therefore, the said statement of camouflage appears to be a figment of imagination by the authority. The next ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsiderations, referred to above, which have also weighed with this Court in holding that an administrative authority must record reasons for its decision are of no less significance. These considerations show that the recording of reasons by an administrative authority serves a salutary purpose, namely, it excludes chances of arbitrariness and ensures a degree of fairness in the process of decisions-making. The said purpose would apply equally to all decisions and its application cannot be confined to decisions which are subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. In our opinion, therefore, the requirement that reasons be recorded should govern the decisions of an administrative authority exercising quasi-judicial functions irrespective of the fact whether the decision is subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. It may, however, be added that it is not required that the reasons should be as elaborate as in the decision of a Court of law. The extent and nature of the reasons would depend on particular facts and circumstances. What is necessary is that the reasons are clear and explicit so as to indicate that the authority has given due consideration to the points in contr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dispensed with expressly or by necessary implication, an administrative authority exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions is required to record the reasons for its decision. 9. In the light of the above, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the first respondent-Commercial Tax Officer has passed a non-speaking order, bereft of reasons, without application of mind to the records produced. The entire findings are in the realm of conjectures and surmises and, therefore, the petitioner was justified in approaching this Court to interfere with the same. 10. Though a counter affidavit is filed, it does not further the case of the first respondent, as it is only the reiteration of the order and in any event, as has been held by the Apex Court in Mohinder Singh Gill and another v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others AIR 1978 SC 851, the counter affidavit cannot improve the case of the department when the order does not speak for itself. Para 8 of the decision in AIR 1978 SC 851 reads as follows:- 8. The second equally relevant matter is that when a statutory functionary makes an order based on certain grounds, its validity must be judged by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
