9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Forms and also to prove that the purchase of paddy was made after and for the purpose of complying with the export order whereas those documents were already produced while framing the assessment under the CST Act, 1956 ?" All the appeals have been filed by same dealer. The assessment years involved are 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. The facts have been taken from VAT Appeal No. 4 of 2011 pertaining to the assessment year 1998-99. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that assessment of the appellant was framed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 28.2.2002 and the benefit of rebate of tax on purchase of paddy, rice manufactured out of which was exported outside India was not granted. The appellant preferred appeal. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rebate of tax on the type of transaction in question was available under Section 5(2)(a)(vi) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short, 'the Act'). The Tribunal, while accepting the rectification application, directed that the Assessing Authority shall decide the issue as directed by the first appellate authority in terms of the judgment of this Court in M/s Rattna Rice and General Mills's case (supra). However, the condition was put in that the dealer shall be liable to produce complete 'H' form and prove that the paddy was purchased for the purpose of complying with any export order. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction by adding word in the judgment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... des that tax on sale and purchase of goods shall not be imposed in case such sale or purchase takes place in the course of export outside the territory of India, provided that it was for compliance of an order for such export. Hence, there was no error in the order passed by the Tribunal directing the appellant to prove that purchase of paddy was for complying with the order of export. She further submitted that paddy is contained in Schedule 'C', whereas stage of tax has been prescribed in Schedule 'D' of the Act. She referred to the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Monga Rice Mill and others v. State of Haryana and another, (2004) 6 SCC 101 to submit that identical issue was considered by Hon'ble the Suprem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preme Court in Monga Rice Mill and others' case (supra), which was a case decided under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. The facts of the case in M/s Rattna Rice and General Mills' case (supra) and the case in hand are identical. Both are the cases of rice shellers, who were purchasing paddy, the rice manufactured out of which was exported outside India. The relevant paras of the judgment are extracted below: "A perusal of the contents of Form 'H' would show that the sale made by the dealer has to be after the agreement or order and it has to be for the purposes of complying with the terms thereof. The columns 5 and 6 of the Part 'B' of the schedule further shows that the goods have been actually exported. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1` is answered against the revenue by holding that the Division Bench judgment of this court in M/s Veerumal Monga and son's case (supra) would not apply to the facts of the instant references and, therefore, the question is answered against the revenue and in favour of the dealer. As a necessary corollary the answer to question no. 2 is required to be answered in favour of the dealer especially when question no.1 has been answered against the revenue. Accordingly, the dealer is held entitled to exemption under Section 5(2)(a)(vi) of the PGST Act. It follows that answer to question no. 3 has to be answered in the negative because the judgment of this court in Veerumal Monga's case (supra) would not apply to the facts and circumstan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
