9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment and liability to AST is thus automatic. The question of determination is not relevant in the present case. It is relevant that the petitioner does not dispute either the turnover or the liability to AST. Immediately on being put to notice, at the first instance (on 10.11.2009) the petitioner made the entire payment of AST by 30.11.2009. Liability to AST is thus not in dispute - in the light of judgment in EID. PARRY (INDIA) LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT), CAC, CHENNAI (AND OTHER CASES) [ 1998 (12) TMI 589 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL] this case attracts interest under Section 24(3) automatically and there is no infirmity in the order challenged. Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - W.P. No.13583 of 2020 and WMP.No.16852 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 1-3-2021 - HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH For Petitioner : Mr. C. Baktha Siromani For Respondent : Mr. ANR. Jaya Prathap, Government Advocate ORDER Heard Mr.C.Baktha Siromani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.ANR.Jayaprathap, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. The petitioner is an assessee for the purposes of Tamil Nadu General ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner and pass orders after hearing the petitioner. 10. Notice dated 16.12.2019 was issued setting out the methodology of computation of interest as per the provisions of Section 24(3) of the Act, and re-quantifying the delay at 1044 days. Representation dated 27.01.2020 came to be filed thereafter, requesting the deferment of interest, relying upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd. V. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (113 VST 233) and a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Kone Elevator India Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer, Mandaveli Assesment Circle, Chennai (27 VST 577). 11. The impugned order has come to be passed on 19.08.2020 rejecting the objections raised. The Assessing Authority relies upon the provisions of Section 2(aaa) of the TNAST Act, inserted vide Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 2005 (Act No.14 of 2005), that provides for levy of interest in line with Section 24(3) of the TNGST Act on interest remaining unpaid under the TNAST Act. 12. According to the petitioner, the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of Section 24(3) read with 24(1) of the TNGST Act, insofar as the levy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be specified in the notice of assessment, not being less than twenty-one days from the date of service of the notice. The tax under sub-section (2) of section 13 shall be paid without any notice of demand. In default of such payments the whole of the amount outstanding on the date of default shall become immediately due and shall be a charge on the properties of the person or persons liable to pay the tax or interest under this Act. 24-(2). . 24-(3) On any amount remaining unpaid after the date specified for its payment as referred to in sub-section (1) or in the order permitting payment in instalments, the dealer or person shall pay, in addition to the amount due, *[interest at one and half per cent per month of such amount for the first three months of default and two per cent per month of such amount for the subsequent period of default]: Provided that if the amount remaining unpaid is less than one hundred rupees and the period of default is not more than a month, no interest shall be paid: Provided further that where a dealer or person has preferred an appeal or revision against 1 [any order of assessment or revision of assessment under this Act], the interest p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nation and intimation to the dealer, he shall pay such tax in such instalments and within such period as may be prescribed. 19. The scheme of levy of interest under the TNGST Act was considered by three Judges of the Supreme Court in E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd. (supra) and useful reference may be made to the same. The appellants were manufacturers of sugar and offered to tax the turnover from the minimum price of sugar prescribed by clause (3) of Sugarcane (control) order, 1966. The aforesaid amount was paid upfront, on the purchase of sugar. By virtue of clause 5-A of the Sugar (Control) order, an additional price also came to be payable. The additional price was determined only at the end of the sugar year and thus the additional consideration received by the petitioner was offered as turnover under a revised return. 20. The question that arose before the Supreme Court was whether interest under Section 24(3) may be charged on the additional price under Clause 5-A and from what date. The Supreme Court held, on a consideration of Sections 13, dealing with advance tax, and Section 24, that it would have been impossible for the assessee to foresee the turnover from the addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which permits charging of interest unless and until there has been a provisional assessment and a notice of demand prescribing the period within which the tax was to be paid. 21. The conclusion of the Bench was that interest could be imposed only if an assessment had been framed, determining the additional turnover and raising a demand upon the assessee. The Bench held that there was no statutory provision which permitted the charging of interest till such time a provisional assessment has been made and a notice of demand raised, prescribing the period within which the assessee would have to remit the tax. 22. Great reliance is placed by Mr.Siromani upon this judgment. However, the position in the present Writ Petition is different, and I am of the view that the aforesaid judgement will not apply. We are not concerned in this case with turnover that has escaped assessment and has not been included in the returns filed. We are concerned with an additional component of tax, being additional sales tax, that the petitioner was liable to pay, on the same turnover as returned originally. To reiterate, there is no dispute on the turnover returned. 23. At paragraph 17, the scheme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the provisions of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941/West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954, that had travelled in appeal before the appellate authority. Pending appeal, conditional stay was granted and the assessee deposited the amounts directed by the appellate authority. The appellate order re-computed the turnover and as a consequence thereof, the tax liability stood reduced. Fresh demand notices were issued levying interest on the entirety of the period, which was challenged by the assessee. When considering the question as to whether the assessee could be held to be one in default , liable to pay interest, the Court held, applying its earlier decision in the case of Income Tax Officer V. Seghu Buchiah Setty (52 ITR 538), as follows: 7. The assessee had preferred appeals against the assessment orders. Pending appeals the assessee had not paid the tax. In the appeal the tax payable was substantially reduced. The Income-tax Officer merely informed the assessee the reduced tax liability and called upon him to pay the reduced amount. No fresh notice of demand was issued. The question was whether the assessee could be treated as a defaulter in the absence of a fresh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
