2013 (1) TMI 702

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rovides that the declaration referred to in sub-section (1) of section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 shall be in form F. The proviso to rule 12(5) provides that a single declaration might cover transfer of goods, by a dealer, to any other place of business, or agent, or principal, as the case may be, effected during a period of one calendar month. There is nothing in the rules which can be construed to vitiate a declaration form only on the ground that it covers transactions exceeding a period of over one month. The assessment has apparently been revised suo motu and ex parte on a misconception of rule 12(5) of the Rules. The impugned order is, thus, set aside and quashed.
INDIRA BANERJEE, J. For the Appellant : Boudhayan Bhatta .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g any statutory deduction." The relevant part of the order impugned is set out hereinbelow: "... Therefore, the matter is decided ex parte to the best of my judgement. It appears from records that the F forms bearing Nos. 37514, 37518 and 37521 covered transactions, as under: Form No. Total value covered Break-up of period of transactions and amount month wise (1) (2) (3) (a) (b) 37514 ₹ 1,21,23,677.75 ₹ 11,05,132.20 (for July 2002) ₹ 1,10,18,545.55 (for August, 2002) 37518 ₹ 15,70,454.05 ₹ 2,54,641.00 (for November 2002) ₹ 13,15,813.05 (for December 2002) 37521 ₹ 12,17,271.75 ₹ 3,86,813.05 (for February 2003) ₹ 8,30,458.70 (for March 2003) ₹ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rules, 1957 which provides that the declaration referred to in sub-section (1) of section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 shall be in form F. The proviso to rule 12(5) provides that a single declaration might cover transfer of goods, by a dealer, to any other place of business, or agent, or principal, as the case may be, effected during a period of one calendar month. There is nothing in the rules which can be construed to vitiate a declaration form only on the ground that it covers transactions exceeding a period of over one month. The assessment has apparently been revised suo motu and ex parte on a misconception of rule 12(5) of the Rules. The impugned order is, thus, set aside and quashed. The writ application is disposed of acco .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X