9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... own in the case of Arulmurugan and Company reported in 51 STC 381 (FB) 4. Brief facts, leading to the revisions, are as follows: (i) Petitioner, M/s.East Coast Bearings, a dealer of bearings, is having its business place at No.1, Natesan Nagar, Villianur Road, Puducherry. Petitioner is a registered dealer and an assessee in the books of Commercial Tax Officer-II, Puducherry, under the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 (Act No.9 of 2007) and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 with TIN/CST Registration No.34230003586. (ii) For the period from July, 2007 to March, 2008, the petitioner had effected interstate sales against Form-C for the value of Rs. 57,51,534/- and effected stock transfer of goods to other States against Form-F to the tune of Rs. 10,62,750/- and since the dealer had not produced the Forms-C/F, declarations for the concessions in time, the Assessing Authority assessed the tax due on the total interstate sales turnover reported at Rs. 2,72,571, out of which, the petitioner had paid a tax of Rs. 1,72,226/- and has to pay a balance tax of Rs. 1,00,345/- as per the details of the taxable turnover determined as below: Inter-State sale of bearings supportedby Form-C taxable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned as below: Inter-State sale of bearings supported by Form-C taxable @ 2% : Rs. 54,64,816/- Inter-State sale of bearings not supported by Form-C taxable @ 4% : Rs. 10,14,347/- Stock Transfer of bearings not supported by Form-F taxable @ 4% : Rs. 33,95,923/- Total & Taxable Turnover determined : Rs. 98,75,086/- Therefore, the balance tax due was determined at Rs. 1,54,547/-, out of the total due determined at Rs. 2,85,707/- by the Assessing Authority and accordingly, passed the assessment order on 02.06.2015 and sent a Notice in Form-3 to the petitioner for remittance of the same. (v) For the period from April, 2010 to March, 2011, the petitioner had effected interstate sales against Form-C for the value of Rs. 79,96,131/- and effected stock transfer of goods to other States against Form-F to the tune of Rs. 9,44,065/- and since the dealer had not produced the Forms-C/F, declarations for the concessions in time, the Assessing Authority assessed the tax due on the total interstate sales turnover reported at Rs. 3,94,194/-, out of which, the petitioner had paid a tax of Rs. 1,96,530/- and has to pay a balance tax of Rs. 1,97,665/- as per the details of the taxable turnover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son that the submission of Form-C was beyond the control of the appellant. The A.R. has not submitted any proof in support of his statement and without establishing a fact, seeking mercy is of no avail. Considering the present fact of the case and as the A.O. has given ample opportunities nearly five to seven years to produce the C-Form declaration, I hereby refuse to accept the reasons mentioned by the A.R. and the request to give time to submit the forms as ample opportunities were given by the A.O. and the appellant assessee not able to submit / upload the declaration forms till the time of issue of assessment order / till the time of filing of the appeals. The declaration 'Forms C/F' produced for the years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 during the time of hearing held on 16.09.2015 were not accepted by the A.O. as the appellant submitted the same after 5 to 7 years of time and that too at the time of hearing only. The view of A.O. is accepted. 15. Consequent to the discussion aforesaid, the proceedings in CST No.34230003586/2007-08 dated 02.06.2015, CST No.34230003586/2008-09 dated 02.06.2015, CST No.34230003586/2009-10 dated 02.06.2015, CST No.34230003586/2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings dated 02.06.2015, for the assessment years, 2007-08 to 2010-11, the petitioner herein, filed appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Puducherry (hereinafter referred to as The Tribunal ) in T.A.Nos.10, 11, 12 & 13 of 2016. (ix) The Tribunal, vide Common Judgement, dated 29.11.2017, dismissed all the appeals, filed by the petitioner herein. At paragraphs 7 to 15, the Tribunal, held as follows: "7. Upon perusing the pleadings, documents and hearing of arguments on both sides, the only point for determination is - Whether the Common Order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Puducherry in Appeal Nos.16,17,18 & 19/CST/2015-16/AAC, dt.18.9.2015 confirming the Order of the Commercial Tax Officer-II, Puducherry for the assessment years 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009- 2010 & 2010-2011 are just and legal? 8. POINT: These appeals have been preferred against the common order passed in Appeal Nos.16,17,18 & 19/CST/2015-16/AAC, dated 18.9.2015, wherein the present appellant has filed those appeals as against the Assessment Order passed by the authorities for the assessment year 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. As against the order passed by the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he time of assessing the tax before the concerned authority and there is no valid grounds stated by the appellant before the 1st Appellate Authority to entertain the Declaration Forms as per Rule 12(7) of the CST Rule 1957 and the time limit is three months after the end of the period to which the Declaration or Certificate relates. Failure to file Declaration Forms within the prescribed time will make the dealer liable to pay tax at the scheduled rates applicable to the goods inside the Union Territory of Puducherry. After scrutinising the returns filed by the appellant, it was found that the appellant had effected interstate sales and stock transfer of goods to other States. In order to avail the concession against the interstate sales transfer, the appellant ought to have filed Declaration in Form-C/F for the years on or before 30.6.2008, 30.6.2009, 30.6.2010 and 30.6.2011 respectively. Thereafter summons were issued to the appellant on 8.2.2011 and 5.3.2011 for the assessment years 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, with a direction to produce relevant documents for completion of assessment. However, the appellant has not responded and submitted the requirement form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... within the stipulated time, but in the cases on hand, the appellant has failed to submit the Form-C/F declarations within the time, that too, for the past 5 to 7 years, the appellant has not submitted the forms before the concerned authority as required by law. 13. On further careful perusal of the demand notice issued by the Commercial Tax Officer-II, Puducherry, they reveal that for some of value, the appellant had submitted the Form-C/F declarations and that too only after issuance of the demand notice by the Commercial Tax Officer-II, Puducherry. After issuance of the notice only, the appellant had filed some Form-C/F declarations for some amount and they failed to submit for the remaining amount of the concession availed under Form-C/F declaration. Then the Commercial Tax Officer had given sufficient chances to pay the balance tax due, even after that, the appellant had not availed the opportunity before the lower authority. If it is so, the appellant on his own negligence failed to avail the opportunity. Now, the appellant has filed copies of some Form-C/F declarations stating that they are ready to submit the forms, but however, the appellant has to state valid reasons fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rately discussed and assessed the tax with the available records. Therefore, there is no fault on the side of the tax assessing authority. As far as the 1st appellate authority is concerned, the contention of the appellant is that, he has not considered the contention of the appellant and that they are even now ready to submit the Form-C/F declarations, but the appellant has not stated any valid reasons thereby the orders passed by the authority below and the 1st appellate authority are within the ambit of law and there is no infirmities found on the order passed by the 1st appellate authority thereby this authority has no warrant to interfere in the order of the 1st appellate authority. Therefore, this Court is of opinion that the appeals filed by the appellant have no merits at all and deserves to be dismissed. The Point is answered accordingly." 5. Aggrieved by the Common Judgement of the Tribunal dated 29.11.2017, petitioner has filed the instant Tax Case (Revision) Nos.19 to 22 of 2018, before this Court, on the following grounds: (i) That the Tribunal, has erred in confirming a higher rate of tax at 4% instead of 3%, on interstate sale covered by valid C Form and levied tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Forms, contrary to the principles laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh and others Vs. Ambuja Cements reported in 143 STC 1 (SC) and several decisions of this Court. (ix) That the Tribunal, ought to have seen that the Assessing Officer has taken up the assessment at a stretch for seven assessment years viz., assessment years 2007-08 to 2013-14 and major portion of declaration Forms were filed in the course of assessment proceedings and therefore the Assessing Officer should have granted sufficient time to furnish the balance declaration forms instead of passing the assessment order in violation of principles of natural justice and fair play. (x) That the Tribunal, ought to have seen that the petitioner filed appeals against all the assessment orders for assessment years 2007-08 to 2013-14 and the appellate authority had accepted the declaration forms uploaded and produced at the time of hearing of the appeals for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2013-14 and set aside the assessment order and remanded back to the assessing officer for re-assessment with a direction to entertain the declaration forms and revise the assessment order vide com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espect of appeals filed for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2013-14, proof was filed during course of hearing of the said appeals, and for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11, sufficient cause for not producing the 'C' form declaration before the Assessing Officer was not produced and hence the appellate authority dismissed the appeal. 7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. Though returns were submitted for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11, the department has taken eight years to finalise the assessment for year 2007-08. No reasons have been assigned for the delay in passing assessment orders, within the financial year. 9. To ascertain the cause shown in the appeals for not producing the 'C' form declarations for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11, we directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to produce the appeal memorandums filed before the appellate authority. 10. In all the appeal memorandums for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11, the revision petitioner / appellant therein, has stated the same reason that 'C' form declarations could not be produced. For bre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .34 AM. Dear Sir, Pl. see your below mail where you have mention c form will be couriered in one week time but nothing has come. NOTE:MR.VELAYUTHAM/MR.KARTHICK, why this delay even you are keeping quite for this issue were you should be also involved, why is delay in issuing c form. Regards, Harish East Coast Bearings." (2) E-mail dated: 14.11.2014 sent by East Coast Bearings to Centralised Accounting Team - HO-EID [email protected] Dear Sir, Pl. see your below mail where you have mention c form will be couriered in one week time but nothing has come. NOTE:MR.VELAYUTHAM/MR.KARTHICK. why this delay even you are keeping quite for this issue were you should be also involved. Regards, Harish (East Coast Bearings)" (3) Email dated 30.10.2014, From Centralised Accounting Team-HO-EID to East Coast Bearings: "Dear sir, Backlog c form is getting ready and we will be despatching to respective plant within a week. Kindly bear with us. Thanks & Regards, Saleem M M (Centralised Accounting Team)" (4) E-mail dated 30.10.2014 sent from Assistant Manager, Commercial-SUG-EID-HO to Centralised Accounting Team - HO-EID: Please sort out the issue immediatel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eived c form, our last date is 08.10.2014. Then after we have to raise debit note for difference in amount. Pl reply. Regards - Harish, East Coast Bearings." (13) E-mail dated 27.03.2015, sent from East Cost Bearings to Bayer: Dear Mr.Sathish, Greetings to you, Please refer to my visit to your office on 25.03.2015 and requested by you for All Invoices Copy from year 2005-2006 to 2013-2014. We have courier all the Invoices yesterday to your Chennai Office. Kindly acknowledge the same and send us the C form by Monday without any further delay. Advance thanks for understanding. Regards, Harish, East Coast Bearings." (14) E-mail dated 21.03.2015 sent from East Coast Bearings to Bayer: Dear Sir, Waiting for your reply for address. NOTE: IF WE ARE NOT GETTING C FORM BY MONDAY THEN WE HAVE RAISE DEBIT-NOTE FOR THE SAME AND ALSO OUR LAST DAY TO SUBMIT THE C FORM IS ALREADY OVER. Pl give priority. Regards, Harish, East Coast Bearings." (15) E-mail dated 18.03.2015, sent from East Coast Bearings to Bayer: Dear Sir, Pl give your Chennai Office address with Contact No by return mail. We will collect the same today. Regards, Harish, East Coast Bearings." (16) E-mail dated 18.03.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... que in favour of the assessing authority for the payment of tax due thereon under the Act." Central Sales Tax Act, 1956: "8(4). The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to any sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner a declaration duly filled and signed by the registered dealer to whom the goods are sold containing the prescribed particulars in a prescribed form obtained from the prescribed authority: Provided that the declaration is furnished within the prescribed time or within such further time as that authority may, for sufficient cause, permit." Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957:- "12(7). The declaration in Form C or Form F or the certificate in Form E-I or Form E-II shall be furnished to the prescribed authority with in three months after the end of the period to which the declaration or the certificate relates: Provided that if the prescribed authority is satisfied that the person concerned was prevented by sufficient cause from furnishing such declaration or certificate with in the aforesaid time, that authority may allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essarily along with returns. On an application being made before the Assessing Officer the exemption can be granted. The object of the Rule is to ensure that the assessee is not denied a benefit which is available to it under law on a technical plea. The Assessing Officer is empowered to grant time. That means that the provisions requiring filing of declaration forms along with the return is a directory provision and not a mandatory provision. In a given case even the declaration forms can be filed before the appellate authority as an appeal is continuation of the assessment proceedings. In a given case, if the appellate authority is satisfied that assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause which dis-enabled him to file the forms in time, it can be accepted. It can also be accepted as additional evidence in support of the claim for deduction. In the instant case, respondent No.1-company made a specific request before the revisional authority which was turned down. Therefore, the question of any non-compliance with the relevant statutes does not arise. It was noted by this Court in Sahney Steel and and Press Works Ltd., v. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 4 SCC 173 that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Pumps Ltd., v. State of Tamil Nadu [Tax Case (Revision) No.87 of 2015, dated 30.09.2015], C-Form declaration to an extent of Rs. 19,98,976/-, was not submitted, for the assessment year 2000-01, within five years from the date of the original assessment order, before the Assessing Officer, as per the circular of the Commissioner. Higher rate of tax was imposed. Being aggrieved by the same, an appeal was filed. Pending appeal, the assessee submitted Form C declaration for a turnover of Rs. 40.28 Lakhs, before the Assessing Officer, who accepted the same, and passed a revised order, dated 29.9.2005. Taking note of the same, the first Appellate Authority passed an order, partly allowing the claim and remanding the matter to the Original Authority. The assessee filed a second appeal before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and by the time, the entire disputed tax had been paid by the assessee. During the pendency of the second appeal, the assessee obtained Form-C declarations for the balance turnover and offered to produce the same. But the learned counsel for the assessee failed to appear before the Tribunal, resulting in dismissal of the appeal. Application filed for restora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
