9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment order justified bringing of the transaction into the fold of A. P. VAT Act and the assessment order does not indicate what are the goods which have been transported from Visakhapatnam and at what point of time and whether they relate to the execution of contract or supply of local goods or supply of imported goods. Further, the assessing officer also erred in stating that the contract was entered into in Visakhapatnam as the very documents indicate that the said three contracts were entered into at Mumbai. The statement of the assessing officer would be right with respect to the situs of the contract only when the goods were available at the time of the contract and the same does not hold good when the goods are to be supplied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the works with M/s. Tuticorin Coal Terminal Private Limited alone is in issue. The principal ground of challenge is that the petitioner though a registered dealer of Visakhapatnam had entered into a contract of supply of goods as well as execution of works on August 23, 2012 with M/s. Tuticorin Coal Terminal Private Limited, a company registered in the State of Tamil Nadu in relation to their establishment of North Cargo Berth-II for handling bulk cargo at V. O. Chidambaranar Port Trust on design, build, finance, operate and transfer (DBFOT) basis. As evidenced from the contract which was entered into in Mumbai, the work is to be executed and was in fact executed at Tuticorin, outside the State of Andhra Pradesh. In terms and scope of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The crucial objection as to how the petitioner is liable to be assessed under the A. P. VAT Act was not advocated to and dealt with. Challenging the assessment, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. When the matter came up for admission on May 1, 2015, this court had granted an interim order directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps to realize the tax of ₹ 8,75,10,108. A counter-affidavit has already been filed and the matter is now listed for filing of reply to the counter-affidavit. A reply affidavit refuting the allegations made in the counter-affidavit is filed by the petitioner. Counsels desired that the writ petition itself to be heard and disposed of. The counter-affidavit filed by the respondent-Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring for the petitioner and Sri S. Suribabu, learned standing counsel for the Department. The main contention raised in the writ petition is in a narrow compass and the issue which is required to be considered is that in the admitted and undisputed facts situation, whether the entire works contract which is to be executed in the State of Tamil Nadu where an assessment could be made to bring the said transaction within the purview of the A. P. VAT Act and the assessment could be made. The assessing officer had dealt with the objections raised by the petitioner as under: "E. Tuticorin Coal Terminal Pvt. Ltd. The dealer submitted three agreements with M/s. Tuticorin Coal Terminal Pvt. Ltd. for verification. As per the statement file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ically in paras 1.7 and 1.8 at page No. 5 of the reply notice dated January 12, 2015. In the said reply notice, it is stated that there was no reference to any of the contentions raised in the impugned order. However, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no other material particularly in relation to the material with respect to the transportation of the goods from Visakhapatnam to M/s. Tuticorin Coal Terminal Private Limited which came to be noticed by the assessing officer based on the search report. However, the learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that the material which came to light to the assessing officer does not appear to have been put to the petitioner and at any rate the same was not made part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the said three contracts were entered into at Mumbai. We are also in agreement with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 20th Century Finance Corpn. Ltd. case [2000] 119 STC 182 (SC); AIR 2000 SC 2436 was misquoted and the statement of the assessing officer would be right with respect to the situs of the contract only when the goods were available at the time of the contract and the same does not hold good when the goods are to be supplied in later point of time. This legal proposition is also not being disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent. In the given set of facts, the assessment so far as the bringing transaction relating to M/s. Tuticorin Coal Terminal Private Limited is concerned, is liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
