9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide order dated 10.04.1998 had levied and collected additional sales tax from the petitioner. The petitioner had approached the Tribunal in O.P.No.559 of 2002, by filing an application under Section 55 of the Act to direct the Assessing Officer to revise the assessment and refund the amount collected as additional sales tax for the assessment year 1996-97. The Tribunal rejected the application by placing reliance on the decision in the case of Siemens Ltd. vs State of Tamil Nadu [110 STC 313]. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Mr.A.S.Mujibur Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Assessing Officer ought to have revised the assessment by passing orders under Section 55 of the Act, in the light of the decision in Siemens Ltd., which was accepted by the Government in G.O.302, Commercial Taxes Department, dated 03.11.1998. It is further submitted that against the decision in Siemens Ltd., the Government has not preferred any appeal in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the decision having become final, the assessment should have been revised. It is further submitted that the turnover for the assessment year 1996-97 should be taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch was taken note of by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Philips India Limited, wherein it was held as follows: "7. It is true that in the decision in question, namely Siemens Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1998] 110 STC 313, the Tribunal had observed: "To give effect to the said intention we proceed to hold that clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the principal Act, namely, Act 14 of 1970 is ultra vires and should stand deleted. We make it clear that we are striking down only clause (a) of section 2(1). The aforesaid observation of the Tribunal considered in isolation, supports the contention of the petitioner to the effect that there was no provision attracting liability to pay additional sales tax before August 1, 1996. However, as rightly observed by the Special Tribunal under the impugned order, the said observation made in [1998] 110 STC 313 has to be understood in the context in which such observation has been made. It is quite well settled that the effect of a judgment has to be examined in its totality and in the context in which it was made and not by referring to a stray sentence here or there, torn totally out of the context in which su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material that the taxable turnover for the period from August 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997 did not exceed Rs. 100 crores. Even assuming that the liability to pay additional sales tax arose only with effect from August 1, 1996, the contention that the taxable turnover after the said date alone could be considered is also not tenable. The Assessing Officer was justified in coming to a conclusion that the taxable turnover for the period between April 1, 1996 and March 31, 1997 being more than Rs. 100 crores, the petitioner was liable to pay additional sales tax even as per the amended provision as contained in Section 2(1)(aa). 9...... 10. Learned senior counsel has contended that under the impugned proceedings reference has been made to Section 55 of the TNGST Act for the purpose of effecting rectification, but jurisdiction under section 55 is not available to be exercised as the matter relates to Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1970. This submission overlooks the basic concept that the levy of additional sales tax under section 2(1)(aa) of the Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1970 is actually collection of sales tax at a higher rate from the dealers having turnover over a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent, we find that the definition of the expression "year" under section 2(1)(t) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act will have no implication, while applying the un-amended Section 2(1)(a) up to July 31, 1996 and the amended Section 2(1)(a) and 2(1)(aa) after August, 1 1996. 13. The definition of the expression "year" which means the financial year, is only for the limited purpose of ascertaining what is the financial year with reference to which the tax liability under the main Act as well as the Additional Sales Tax under the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Act is to be worked out. The mere fact that underSection 2(1)(a), a reference is made to a "year", the same will not in any way create any different impact, while applying the liability or the rate of tax to be worked out during the financial year. In other words, if in the very same financial year, different rates are to be worked out by virtue of prescription of such different rates, due to statutory amendments, the only exercise to be carried out would be to ascertain the period for which the different rates of tax are to be worked out. In our considered view, such prescription of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility, for the rest forty lakhs of rupees, the liability by way of additional tax should be calculated at the rate of 1.5% and if for the whole of the financial year, the taxable turn over exceeded Rs. 100 crores, for the remaining amount of Rs. 99.50 lakhs i.e, excluding Rs. 50 lakhs, which is relatable to the period only upto July 31, 1996, the rate of tax as per the amended Section 2(1)(aa) will have to be worked out. 17. Keeping the above statutory implication relating to payment of additional sales tax as was applicable upto July 31, 1996 and after August 1, 1996, when we examine the order of the Assessing Authority dated 28.1.1998, in the case on hand, we find that the taxable turnover of the respondent - assessee was Rs. 54,97,880/- up to July 31, 1996. The taxable turnover for the financial year is stated to have exceeded rupees one crore. But for the purpose of calculation of additional sales tax, since for the whole of the financial year, the taxable turnover did not exceed one hundred crores, there would be no necessity to make any further calculation for the period beyond July 31, 1996. The Assessing Authority calculated the additional sales tax at the rate of 2% o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
