9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 629X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il 25, 1996 for Rs. 65,43,222. Against the aforesaid bill on the claim of the purchaser that the machine was not properly working and as a result of negotiations credit note for Rs. 14,29,900 was issued by the applicant in favour of M/s. Munjal Showa Limited, Gurgaon. The sale consideration was reduced by Rs. 14,29,900 and on the balance amount the liability of tax has been admitted. The assessing authority disallowed the claim of reduction of the sale consideration by Rs. 14,29,900 and had levied Central sales tax on the entire amount of bill for Rs. 65,43,222. The applicant had also sold one machine to M/s. Vengatachalam Engineering Works Private Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu) and had despatched the same against challan No. 151, dated Decemb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it was decided to reduce the price by 25 per cent being Rs. 14,29,900. As a result of which debit note was issued by M/s. Munjal Showa Limited, Gurgaon for Rs. 16,35,806, which included the principal amount of Rs. 14,29,900 and the amount of excise duty and Central sales tax thereon. On the receipt of debit note, applicant wrote a letter dated July 1, 1997 to M/s. Munjal Showa Limited, Gurgaon stating therein that the reduction of 25 per cent would be allowed only on principal amount and the amount of excise duty and Central sales tax for Rs. 2,05,906 would be considered for payment only after getting the same from Government department as the same have been deposited in the Government department and accordingly, credit note for Rs. 14,29,9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eduction of price by issuing the credit only beyond the specified period is not admissible and the claim of the applicant has rightly been rejected. With regard to the second transaction, namely, dispatch of machine to M/s. Vengatachalam Engineering Works Private Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu), he submitted that the machine was sent against challan to the said party. Builty was also prepared in the name of the said party, therefore, presumption is that the delivery of the goods must have been taken by the said party. He submitted that no evidence has been adduced by the applicant to prove that the delivery was not taken by M/s. Vengatachalam Engineering Works Private Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu) but had been taken by the agent of the applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espect of each part of the turnover liable to a different rate of tax; (b) the sale price of all goods returned to the dealer by the purchasers of such goods, (i) within a period of three months from the date of delivery of the goods, in the case of goods returned before the 14th day of May, 1966; (ii) within a period of six months from the date of delivery of the goods in the case of goods returned on or after the 14th day of May, 1966: Provided that satisfactory evidence of such return of goods and of refund or adjustment in accounts of the sale price thereof is produced before the authority competent to assess or, as the case may be, reassess the tax payable by the dealer under this Act; and (c) such other deductions as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remains under the terms of the contract throughout with the contractee and the contractor is bound to return the unused goods to the contractee. Explanation. For the purposes of this rule, gross turnover shall mean the aggregate of the amounts received or receivable by a dealer in an assessment year as valuable consideration for the transfer of property in goods used in the execution of a works contract after the commencement of this rule, whether or not the amount receivable as valuable consideration for such transfer is separately shown in the works contract and whether the execution of such works contract commenced during the year earlier, and includes any advance received by the dealer towards valuable consideration for the works con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, the refund of the amount of tax can only be allowed under the provision of section 29A(3) of the Act. So far as the second transaction, namely, the supply of goods to M/s. Vengatachalam Engineering Works Private Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu) is concerned, admittedly, the goods were despatched to M/s. Vengatachalam Engineering Works Private Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu) which is clear from the delivery challan, annexure 12 to the revision petition. The builty was in the name of the said party, therefore, presumption is that the delivery of the goods must have been given to the said party. No evidence has been adduced to prove that the delivery was not given/taken by M/s. Vengatachalam Engineering Works Private Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
