9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances of this case It is further reaffirmed by Rule 8(9) of the Rules which specifically states that a registered dealer is bound to surrender to the appropriate Assessing Authority all unused declaration forms remaining in hand upon cancellation of his certificate. Thus, Forms once issued per se have validity in terms of the Rules. The rejection of the Forms in the present case and claiming deduction on the basis thereof for the sale of PVC resins at ₹ 9,25,52,964/- was contrary to law. The findings of the Sales Tax Tribunal and the Authorities below are accordingly reversed. Appropriate relief shall be given to the dealer - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee. - ST. APPL. 46/2014 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2016 - S. Ravindra Bhat And Najmi Waziri, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. H. L. Taneja and Mr. Sunil Kumar Batra, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Satyakam, Additional Standing Counsel for Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ms. Rakhi Singhal, Advocate ORDER S. Ravindra Bhat, J. ( Oral ) 1. The question of law framed on 04.10.2016 is as follows:- Did the Appellate Tribunal fall into error in holding that the ST-1 forms used by the assessee w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g intended for use by him as raw materials in the manufacture in Delhi of any goods, other than goods specified in t he Third Schedule, or newspaper,- (1) for sale by him inside Delhi; (2) for sale by him in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, being a sale occasioning, or effected by transfer of documents of title to such goods, during the movement of such goods from Delhi; or . (3) for sale by him in the course of export outside India being a sale occasioning' the movement of such goods from Delhi, or a sale effected during the movement of such goods from Delhi, to a place outside India and after the goods have crossed the customs frontiers of India; or (B) of goods of the class or classes specified in the certificate of registration of such dealer as being intended for resale by him in Delhi, or for sale by him in the course of inter-State trade or commerce or in the course of export outside India in the manner specified in sub-item (2) or subitem (3) of item (A), as the case may be: and (C) of containers or other materials used for the packing of goods, of the class or classes specified in the certificate of registration of such dealer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom this Tribunal as to whether there is any provision in the Act or Rule which prohibits a dealer from using a declaration form issued for an earlier year in the subsequent years, Ld. Counsel for Revenue produced a Circular issued by the Commissioner, Sales Tax on 21.09.1994. A careful perusal of this Circular reveals that the very spirit of issuing this Circular was to simplify the procedure for issue of declaration forms. On the particular point of issue of declaration forms for a particular year, the Circular states as under:- All the statutory forms issued would be stamped for the particular year for which the transactions pertain. While issuing the forms it has to be ensured that the dealers/ name/ address R.C No. are reflected thereon through a stamp it is also stamped and signed by the Assessing Authority. 5. The Tribunal while doing so rejected the appellant s contention that the circulars were not binding and concluded that the concerned Authorities could issue directions by virtue of Section 4 (2)(a)(v) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act ) and Rules 8 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1975 prescribed thereunder. 6. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f every form, through circulars, is not in accordance with law. In this regard, learned counsel relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax, UP Vs. Indira Industries, (2001) 122 STC 100. 10. Mr. Satyakam, learned counsel for the Revenue relied upon Rule 7 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1975 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules ) and in particular emphasised upon second proviso to Rule 7 (1) thereof to say that even though not explicit, the law mandates that declarations have to be collected on yearly/annual basis. Elaborating further, it was submitted that in this case, it is quite evident that after the issuance of circular on 23.06.1995, the selling dealer resorted to interpolations in this case by striking off the real date of the transaction i.e. 31.03.1995 and instead inserting 23.11.1996 . Counsel submitted that having regard to the declaration of law and to control abuse of the kind which this case has shown, the circular was issued. It was submitted that the circular is in consonance with the provisions of law and does not, in any manner, detract from the Act or any Rule. Therefore, they were not only binding upon the dealers but also up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year covered by one declaration is equal to or less than ₹ 5,00,000 or such other amount as the Commissioner may, from time to time, specify in this behalf in the Official Gazette : Provided further that where, in the case of any transaction of sales, the delivery of goods is spread over different years it shall be necessary to furnish a separate declaration in respect of goods as delivered in each year. 13. The relevant Form/declaration adverted to i.e. Form ST-1 annexed to the Rules is as follows:- FORMS COUNTER FOIL FORM ST-1 ( See rule 7 ) FORM OF DECLARATION FOR PURCHASES BY REGISTERED DEALERS Seal of the issuing authority Serial No......................... To ..................................(Seller) ..................................(Address) Declaration given against: DUPLICATE/ORIGINAL FORM ST-1 ( See rule 7 ) FORM OF DECLARATION FOR PURCHASES BY REGISTERED DEALERS Issued to holder of Serial No....... Registration Certificate Seal of the issuing No.................. authority To ............. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
