9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the exporter to claim set-off of the customs duty component at the time of import. The petitioner was granted the DEPB under the provisions of the MVAT Act at Mumbai and the sale and delivery of the pass book was completed in Maharashtra - Section 2(33) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act restricts levy of tax on sales that takes place outside the State of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner's right to claim set-off had originated by grant of the DEPB in the State of Maharashtra and delivered for sale in Maharashtra. The petitioner was also subjected to sales tax in the State of Maharashtra. The issue with regard to respondent's right to levy tax for a sale that takes place outside the state of Tamil Nadu was the subject matter in PREMIER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nadu. 3. The petitioner had contended that the pass book was issued and delivered in Mumbai and the sale of delivery of the pass book was completed in Maharashtra, for which, Maharashtra VAT was paid under the MVAT Act. The respondent do not have the jurisdiction to levy tax on sale of DEPB. 4. The object of DEPB scheme is to neutralize the incidence of customs duty of the import content of the export product. The neutralization is granted by way of grant of duty credit against the export product, thereby enabling the exporter to claim set-off of the customs duty component at the time of import. The petitioner was granted the DEPB under the provisions of the MVAT Act at Mumbai and the sale and delivery of the pass book was completed in Mah ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are exigible to sales tax. There is no dispute on this position. 11. The sole argument of the Revenue is that the petitioner is an exporter, exporting and importing from the Tuticorin Port. Clause 4.3.4 of the Foreign Trade Policy containing the DEPB Scheme makes it clear that the passbook is issued only in regard to a specified Port, which in this case is Tuticorin. This then is the only nexus which the State of Tamil Nadu has to the transaction in question and in my considered view, is insufficient to bring the transaction to tax in Tamil Nadu. 12. The Division Bench in the case of Lal Products (supra) was dealing with the sale of patent rights and the determination of situs of that transaction. The Bench notes as a finding of fact that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt in the case of Tata Consultancy Services V. State of Andhra Pradesh ((2004) 137 STC 620) have considered scenarios where intangible goods, such as REP licence/DEPB licence and computer software have been reduced to fixed media, such as compact discs holding that once in the form of a physical commodity, the asset assumes the form of ascertained goods for the purpose of levy of sales tax. There is no clash in my mind in regard to the aforesaid categories and the argument of the Revenue in this regard is clearly misconceived. 7. The aforesaid order is self explanatory. As such, the respondent herein will not have jurisdiction to levy tax on sale of a Duty Entitlement Pass Book for a sale and delivery, which was completed in Maharastra. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
