9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal and remand the matter back to the Tribunal for de novo consideration of the levy of penalty along with the claim of the assessee in the Cross Appeal - Tribunal is directed to pass orders on the Cross Objection filed by the assessee by following Notification No.528 dated 21.11.1997 - Decided in favour of assessee. - TC (R). Nos. 49 and 50 of 2011 and MP. No. 1 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 15-9-2011 - Chitra Venkataraman And M. Jaichandren,JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. Hema Muralikrishnan For the Respondent : Mr. R. Sivaraman, Special Government Pleader ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Chitra Venkataraman,J) After serving notice on the learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the Revenue, the Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat without considering the merits of the Cross Appeal and without giving specific finding on the Cross Appeal filed by the assessee, the Tribunal committed a serious error in dealing with the levy of penalty alone. She pointed out that when the assessee had made a specific issue as to the assessability of the Tribunal relating to the assessee being a 100% Export Oriented Unit, the question of levy of penalty in the facts and circumstances of the case did not arise. While taking us through the provisions of Section 4E of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance on Notification No. 528 dated 21.11.1987 which granted exemption to 100% export oriented units or units located in the Madras Export Pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red Cross Objection, in which it contended that even though the Commissioner had deleted the penalty, the quantum of assessment should have been allowed in favour of the assessee by following the notification. 6. As already pointed out, a perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that while discussing the contention of the assessee in paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 12, there is no decision arrived ultimately on the claim of the assessee on the claim of exemption based on Notification No.528 dated 21.11.1997. On the other hand, immediately after referring the contention of the assessee in the exemption as raised in the Cross Objection, it went ahead with the penalty appeal preferred by the Revenue and restored the penalty. 7. We feel that wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ither at sale point or purchase point. On the mere fact that the levy is on at purchase point, does not mean, it ceases to be a sales tax. Irrespective of the point of levy, tax on goods is treated as sales tax only vide the decision reported in 98 STC 125 (Sulochana Cotton Spinning Mills Vs. State of Tamil Nadu) 10. In the circumstances, rejecting the contention of the Revenue, the order of the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for de novo consideration. The Tribunal is directed to pass orders on the Cross Objection filed by the assessee by following Notification No.528 dated 21.11.1997 and in accordance with law. 11. In the result, the above Tax Case (Revisions) are allowed. No costs. Consequently, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
