9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is true that if the turnover of the writ petitioner is taken for the year in entirety, it would be less than a sum of Rs. 100 Crores. However for the purpose of assessment, the assessing authority is bound to apply the provisions of the Act strictly from their dates of insertion into the Act. Hence for the period 01.04.1996 to 31.07.1996, as the turnover of the petitioner is in the region of Rs. 15.66 Crores, which is far in excess of Rs. 10.00 lakhs, the petitioner cannot avoid liability under the TNAST Act. Writ Petition is dismissed. - Honourable Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth And Honourable Mr. Justice G.Arul Murugan For the Petitioner : Mr. K.A. Parthasarathy for Mr. N.Inbarajan For the Respondents : Mr. Haja Nazirudeen, Additional Advoca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the original threshold of Rs. 10.00 lakhs would stand in regard to casual traders or agents of non-resident dealers or local branches of a firm or company outside India, and enhanced the threshold to Rs. 100 Crores in respect of other dealers. 5. The amendment was itself challenged before the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal which by its order in Siemens Ltd. V. State of Tamil Nadu (110 STC 313) held the same to be ultravires striking down clause (a) of Section 2 (1) of the TNAST Act. Hence parity was brought amongst all dealers in the threshold to be maintained for the levy of AST. The extant position in law hence, is that the threshold for levy of AST in terms of Section (2) of the TNAST Act stood amended, enhancing the thres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seeks to argue, based on the observations at paragraph 8 above, there should be no liability for AST at all based on the factual position that the entirety of its turnover was less than Rs. 100 crores. 8. Mr.Haja Nazirudeen, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.G.Nanmaran, learned Special Government Pleader for the Commercial Taxes Department, would disagree with the interpretation put forth reiterating the settled position that an amendment must be given effect to from its effective date and not retrospectively, unless specifically provided. For this purpose, he would press into service the decision of this court in State of Tamil Nadu V. National Time Co. (39 VST 247). 9. Having heard the rival contentions of both parties, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
