9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt can only proceed against the selling registered dealer in view of the fact the registered dealer has been furnished a false certificate and tax has been paid? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law to maintain order of the Assessing Authority when the requirements of section 18 have been fully complied with by the petitioner-assessee? Held that:- For claiming deduction from payment of tax on a subsequent sale of goods on which tax has been paid by the first seller, the dealer (second seller) has to furnish the certificate in the prescribed form and manner and signed by the registered dealer from whom the goods were purchased to the effect that the tax on such goods has been paid at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the first stage of sale. It is further the case of the petitioner that the selling dealers of vegetable ghee issued to him declaration in form ST-14 declaring that the tax had already been paid. During the course of assessment, the petitioner had furnished copies of bills along with the declaration forms in form ST-14 to claim that the goods have already suffered tax at the hands of the first purchaser and therefore, the claim of tax paid, as well, is permissible to him under section 18 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), the petitioner being a subsequent seller. However, the claim of the petitioner was disallowed by the Assessing Authority on the ground that no tax had actually been paid by the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax by the selling registered dealers during currency of their registration certificate makes the purchasing registered dealer liable to pay the tax, in spite of the fact that the selling registered dealer has furnished declaration to the effect that tax has been paid? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the department can only proceed against the selling registered dealer in view of the fact the registered dealer has been furnished a false certificate and tax has been paid? (iv) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law to maintain order of the Assessing Authority when the requirements of section 18 have been fully complied with by the petitioner-assessee? ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and, therefore, according to him, the impugned orders are legal and correct and the present petition is liable to be dismissed. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Section 18 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, is reproduced hereinafter below: The State Government may, by notification, direct that in respect of such goods, other than the goods specified in Schedules C and D, and with effect from such date as may be specified in the notification, the tax under section 15 shall be levied at the first stage of sale thereof, subject to the conditions and restrictions as the Government may specify in this behalf, and on the issue of such notification the tax on such goods shall be levied accordingly: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so not disputed by the department that till date no action has been taken against the said registered dealer for recovery of tax. The Madras High Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Raichael Chacko [1985] 59 STC 144 has held that once a proper declaration, i.e., form ST-14 has been furnished by the dealer to the assessing authority the dealer is entitled to claim deduction from the payment of sales tax on a subsequent sale of the goods on which tax has been paid at the stage of first sale and it is not the duty of the subsequent seller to pay tax if the first seller has not paid the tax and it is the duty of the department to proceed against him and not the purchasing dealer. In the case of Govindan Co. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1975] 35 STC 50 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the law laid down by the Madras High Court in Raichael Chacko's case [1985] 59 STC 144 and Raman Co. case [1994] 93 STC 185 (SC), the dealer is entitled to claim deduction from the payment of sales tax on a subsequent sale for goods on which tax has been paid at the stage of first sale and it is not the duty of the subsequent seller to pay tax if the first seller has not paid the tax. No contrary judgment has been cited by the respondents. Thus, we are of the view that the aforementioned questions of law do arise in the present case and, therefore, we direct the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana to draw a statement of the case and refer to this court for its decision the questions of law as aforementioned in para 5 of the judgmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
