Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2000)120STC646Tribunal
1. The tax case miscellaneous petition to set aside the ex parte order in T.C. No. 3677 of 1997 dated August 24, 1999 and restore it on file was taken up, and after hearing the Government Advocate, it was restored on the file.2. Thereafter, Mr. D.T. Chopda, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended as follows : The assessee by mistake collected sales tax and surcharge on tax-suffered goods and after the mistake being pointed out by the assessing authority, the assessee refunded the money by issuing credit notes in the month of April, 1980. This fact was referred to in the order of the Appellate Tribunal and when the entire amount collected as tax and surcharge has been refunded, there is no case to levy any penalty. In this connection, he referred to the decisions reported in R.S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat v. Ajit Mills Limited [19771 40 STC 497 (SC), Amrutanjan Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1995] 97 STC 575 (Mad) ; (1994) 6 MTCR 562 and State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Moh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2000)120STC493Tribunal
1. This tax revision case came before a division Bench of the Special Tribunal and has been referred to a Full Bench because of the points involved in the case and certain apparent conflict in decisions.2. The petitioner/assessee is a dealer in "I.V," fluids and for the year 1986-87 they reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 15,75,129.11. On verification of the accounts it was found that the gross profit was about 32.62 per cent which was very high in the trade.They had not also maintained production-cum-stock account for the manufacture of medicines. The dealers had purchased empty bottles from unregistered dealers and used them in the manufacture of medicines for sales. In view of the above defects and circumstances the assessing authority proposed to reject the accounts as incorrect and incomplete.He added 1 per cent for defects to the sales turnover of harmless medicines and multi-point goods. He brought to tax the purchase turnover of empty bottles at 10 per cent under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2000)120STC200Tribunal
1. The point for consideration in all these tax revision cases is whether mochai and horsegram fall under the entry "pulses" in the Second Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Madurai Bench) in these cases held that mochai and horsegram would fall under the botanical family "leguminosae". This decision was arrived at on the basis of dictionary meaning discussed by the Tribunal in the orders. In that view the Tribunal held that mochai and horsegram would be covered by entry 6A of the Second Schedule to the Act which relates to pulses of various kinds noted therein.2. Mr. R. Mahadevan, the learned Government Advocate, in all these revisions urged that according to the expert opinion of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, the mochai would not fall under the item "masur or lentil". Similarly, horsegram also would not be covered by the entry 6A of the Second Schedule to the Act.3. The learned counsel for the respondent stated that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2001)122STC288Tribunal
1. These tax revision cases are filed against the orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench) in T.A. Nos. 1235 of 1992, 983 of 1992, 671 of 1992 and 1277 of 1992 dated November 3, 1993. The appellant is a dealer in gases and oxygen. The assessments relate to the years 1986-87 to 1988-89. The disputes raised in these revision petitions are as follows : (a) Levy of tax at 10 per cent on cylinder holding charges collected by the assessee on the sales of gas and oxygen. The relevant turnover details are as follows :1986-87 Rs. 7,53,976 at 10 per cent1987-88 Rs. 9,56,084 at 10 per cent1987-88 Revision of assessment at 10 per cent Rs. 16,61,857 (b) Cost of lost cylinders assessed to tax on a turnover of Rs. 20,700 at 10 per cent for the assessment year 1987-88 in the original assessment.2. The facts leading to the present revisions in respect of the disputed items are as follows : The assessee claimed that cylinders are loaned to the customers for use of the gases contained in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2000)120STC641Tribunal
1. Tax Case Revision No. 2929 of 1997 relates to Tax Case No. 190 of 1994 on the file of the High Court, Madras. This tax revision case under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Coimbatore, dated September 10, 1991 made in T.A. No. 163 of 1991, relating to the assessment year 1988-89. The assessee had returned a turnover of Rs. 96,480 as being first sales of "hoists".This turnover was assessed by the assessing officer at 15 per cent. On first appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the argument that the goods namely, hoists would fall under the entry "machinery" and held that it was rightly taxed as falling under entry 133 relating to "lifts". He, therefore, confirmed the assessment at 15 per cent. On second appeal the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal found that the goods sold were being used in the engineering industry to move articles from one place to another. Therefor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2000)118STC24Tribunal
1. This tax revision case is against the order of Tamil Nadu Taxation Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Madurai, in M.T.A. No. 233 of 1985 dated July 17, 1986 by challenging the levy of tax of Rs. 21,368 at 4 per cent on a turnover of Rs. 5,34,185 under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for the assessment year 1981-82.2. The revision-petitioner Tvl. Rajapalayam Cotton Pressing Factory, Rajapalayam, reported a total and taxable turnover nil before the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-II, Rajapalayam. The assessing officer after checking of accounts and records found that the purchase of hoop iron or iron pattai from Tvl. Babu Traders, Madurai, for a sum of Rs. 5,34,196 and so also the purchase of hessian cloth from one Thiru S.Krishnan, Sivakasi, for a sum of Rs. 45,500 totalling at Rs. 5,79,696 leviable with purchase tax under 7-A(1)(b) of the TNGST Act on the ground that there was no such sales to the assessee as claimed. So the assessing authority determined the total and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2001)121STC385Tribunal
1. The only issue which arises for consideration in this tax revision case is whether sales of trailers attract tax at 15 per cent under entry 3 of the First Schedule or whether trailers can be brought under entry 55 or 55-A of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. Before us, the learned counsel for the petitioner also urges the point that even if trailers do not come under entry 55 or 55-A of the Schedule, they should be taxed as only a multi-point item.We have perused the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and we find that the Tribunal has extracted all the entries, namely, entries 3, 55 and 55-A of the First Schedule to the TNGST Act. Therefore, there is no need to extract those items in this judgment. After extracting the said items the Tribunal proceeds to say that neither entry 55 nor entry 55-A mentions the name "trailer" anywhere. On the other hand, entry 3 of the First Schedule specifically refers to "all varieties of trailers, by whatever n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
1. Petition on being called today upon hearing both sides the Tribunal ordered as follows : This original petition is against the revision of assessment by the respondent in assessment No. 209346/93-94 dated March 31, 1999. The facts leading to the present petition are as follows : Originally the assessing authority proposed to levy tax at 3 per cent as first sales under item 69(ii) of Part B of the First Schedule on the imported flax fibre not reported in the return. Though no objection was filed against the proposal, the assessing authority stated that the turnover of fibre flax is taxable at 3 per cent under the Second Schedule and not under item 69(ii) of Part B as stated in the pre-assessment notice dated February 15, 1995 and assessed the turnover to tax in the order passed by him on March 31, 1995. Subsequently, the assessing authority issued a pre-assessment notice dated March 16, 1999 proposing to assess that turnover of Rs. 1,89,60,195 representing flax fibre at 8 per cent i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
Reported in : (2000)118STC504Tribunal
1. These two original petitions relating to two different assessment years and seek to quash the orders passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruppur, under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. A perusal of the impugned order shows that earlier orders of assessment were passed by the officer and while doing so certain errors had crept in the assessment years. The errors are as follows : (1) The period of deferral of sales tax has been adopted up to March 31, 1997, instead of November 30, 1996. (2) The rate of tax on the local purchases of cotton has been adopted at 4 per cent for the period from March 5, 1997 to March 31, 1997 instead of the correct rate of tax of 2 per cent for the above period.2. To set right the above defects, notice was issued on April 12, 1999 to the assessee calling for objections within 15 days of the receipt of the notice. The petitioner did not file any objections. Therefore the order was passed on May 10, 1999 rectifying the errors as a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT Tamil Nadu
1. The petitioner is a company engaged in the export and import of sugar. For the year 1994-95 they had imported 13,000 m.t. of refined sugar from Thailand. They had effected sales in Tamil Nadu and also to dealers outside the State. However, since the outside dealers took delivery of the goods in Tamil Nadu the entire sales were treated as local sales. According to the petitioner they did not collect sales tax because they thought that the goods were exempt from sales tax. When a demand notice was served on them on June 24, 1994, they promptly filed Writ Petition Nos. 12275 to 12277 of 1994 on the file of the High Court. The High Court granted stay of recovery of sales tax in respect of sales effected prior to June 24, 1994. Those writ petitions were transferred to the Special Tribunal and numbered as T.P. Nos. 2413 to 2415 of 1997 and disposed of on June 17, 1997 permitting the petitioners to file objections. Thereafter the present impugned order has been passed on September 16, 199...
Tag this Judgment!