9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1073X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the purchaser or by the assessee at the time when the same was produced for availing the benefit under Section 3(3) of the Act. It was in those circumstances, the Assessing Authority was forced to revise the turnover and make the assessment for a sum of ₹ 1,03,600/-. In fact it is also not in dispute that the ultimate product manufactured by the purchaser who supplied Form-XVII to the petitioner was Benzion (Sambirani) which is not one of the item mentioned in the First Schedule. In as much as Form-XVII relied upon by the petitioner having not satisfied the statutory prescription of fulfilling all the required particulars to be filled-in in the said format, the assessee cannot be heard to say irrespective of such defects in the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntly revised the turnover and levied the tax at a higher rate viz., at 8% on the sales turnover of Rs.1,03,600/- and also levied a penalty of Rs.8,936/- under Section 23 of the TNGST Act. The said revision came to be made on the footing that the petitioner produced an invalid Form-XVII. 3. The petitioner went before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner while confirming the revision of tax as ordered by the Assessing Authority, deleted the penalty of Rs.8,936/-. By the impugned order, the Tribunal also upheld the orders of the Assessing Authority as confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. It is in the above stated background, the petitioner has come forward with this revision. 4. Assa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... XVII in the sense that it does not satisfy the statutorily prescribed format for a duly filed in Form-XVII, the said settled principle will have no application. 7. Having heard the respective counsel, we find force in the submission of the learned Special Government Pleader. In this context, we refer to the recent decision of this Court reported in (2006) 148 STC 419 (Sree Murugan Engineering Products Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Coimbatore) wherein all the earlier decisions have been duly followed. We cull out the principles which are to be followed while examining the correctness of the order like the one impugned in this revision. 8. In the said decision, two earlier decisions of this Court and a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 222, held that the duty of the Seller who received such a declaration, therefore, is confined to make sure that the declaration has been duly filed in and signed by the purchaser/dealer and that the form given to the seller is the one prescribed and obtained from the prescribed authority. The duty of the seller ends there. He is under no further obligation to enquire into whether the buyer is engaged in a process or manufacture and if so, whether the articles purchased from the seller are to be put to use as the component part of the product manufactured by the buyer. In another decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chunni Lal Parshadi Lal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. (1986) 62 STC 112 (SC), it was held as under at Page 12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the goods sold should be for the use by the purchaser as component part of any other good mentioned in the First Schedule which the purchaser intends to manufacture inside the State for sale. 11. When we perused the required Form-XVII as prescribed under the Act, we find that there is a specific column in 'column-b' which is required to be filled in and the requirement is description of the goods to be manufactured with serial number of first schedule . In so far as the petitioner is concerned, admittedly the said column was not filled-in either by the purchaser or by the assessee at the time when the same was produced for availing the benefit under Section 3(3) of the Act. It was in those circumstances, the Assessing Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be of no consequence in so far as the petitioner assessee is concerned. 13. In as much as Form-XVII relied upon by the petitioner having not satisfied the statutory prescription of fulfilling all the required particulars to be filled-in in the said format, the assessee cannot be heard to say irrespective of such defects in the production of Form-XVII, the assessee should be conferred with the concessional rate of tax as prescribed under Section 3(3) of the Act and that any other consequential liability should be fastened only on the purchaser. 14. The various principles set out in the decisions referred to above, can have no application to the case of the petitioner since the Form-XVII produced by the petitioner does not confir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
