Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2008)12VST421NULL
1. The petitioner is carrying on business of manufacturing batteries which are exclusively required and used for railway coaches and engines. The petitioner submitted an application under Section 102 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as, "the VAT Act") before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes requesting him for determining the question of the rate of tax payable on railway carriage batteries. By his order dated July 12, 2006, the Commissioner gave his decision that the railway carriage batteries are integral parts of railway coaches and engines and as such those batteries are covered under entry 60 of Schedule C, Part I, attracting tax at four per cent. While giving his decision, the Commissioner has added that his decision is an advance ruling and will apply prospectively. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid rider in the order of the Commissioner, the petitioner has moved this Tribunal.2. Mr. Chakraborty, learned Advocate appearing for the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2008)14VST124NULL
1. MRF Limited, the respondent herein is a well-known manufacturer of different types of tyres and tubes, and is a registered dealer under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in short, "the 1994 Act"). In course of its business the respondent imports tyre, tube, flap retreading materials, tyre bands, etc., from its factory or branch office located outside West Bengal into West Bengal.2. During assessment of the respondent's tax liability for the year from October 1, 1996 to September 30, 1997 under the provisions of the 1994 Act, the respondent-dealer claimed, among others, deduction of certain discounts allowed by the company to different purchasers of its goods, viz., cash discount, additional trade discount, turnover discount, prompt-payment discount, etc. The assessing officer did not allow those deductions excepting cash discount. The respondent preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Corporate Division.3. By order dated July 27, 2001 the Deputy Com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2007)8VST475NULL
1. In this application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 filed on December 2003, applicants No. 1 Damodhar Cement and Slag Ltd., No. 2 the Associated Cement Companies Ltd., both public limited companies registered under the Companies Act, 1956, No.3 Muthuswamy Balaji and Kousik Gupta both shareholders of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 companies, respectively, prayed for declaration that Section 16B of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 is illegal and ultra vires the Constitution of India insofar as it purports to withdraw and/or frustrate and/or nullify the remission of sales tax allowed to petitioner No. 1 Damodhar Cement and Slag Ltd., under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 1993 and also under Section 41 read with Section 44 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 ; direction compelling the Government of West Bengal to honour its promise contained in the aforesaid Scheme particularly Clause 14 thereof and the remission of tax allowed to petitioner No. 1 Da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2008)13VST476NULL
1. At the material point of time, the petitioner No. 2, Smt. Archana Kejriwal as proprietress of the petitioner No. 1 firm, M/s. Premier Films, was carrying on business of reselling x-ray films. Commercial Tax Officer, Shyambazar Charge, (in short, "the CTO") assessed the petitioners' sales tax dues for the year 1992-93 under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as, "the 1941 Act") and passed an assessment order on May 8, 1995 estimating gross turnover at Rs. 3,50,000 instead of the book figure of Rs. 3,01,483.50.In his assessment order, the CTO treated x-ray films as photographic films and levied tax at 11 per cent under Section 5(1)(d) of the Act of 1941 instead of eight per cent under Section 5(1)(e) of the said Act.The petitioners preferred appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, North Circle. By order dated September 14, 1995, the Assistant Commissioner did not accept the contention of the petitioners that x-ray films could not be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2007)10VST269NULL
1. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the provisions of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as, "the 1994 Act") was, at the relevant point of time, carrying on business of reselling various materials. In course of his business the petitioner was importing goods from outside the State for sale within the State of West Bengal. In or about January, 2000, the petitioner imported various types of chemicals and plastic household articles (hereinafter referred to as, "the disputed goods") from Mumbai to sell those in this State.The vehicle carrying the disputed goods entered West Bengal at Chichira Check-post on January 12, 2000. The driver of the vehicle produced the invoices issued by the alleged suppliers, viz., M/s. Raja Chemicals and M/s. Pratibha Trading Company, consignment notes, lorry challan and way-bills as required under the Rules framed under the 1994 Act and got those duly endorsed by the check-post authorities. The vehicle proceeded towards Calc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2007)10VST385NULL
1. In these batch of cases two well-known members' clubs, namely, Calcutta Club and Hindusthan Club have challenged the actions of the sales tax authorities of the State of West Bengal to levy sales tax on the supplies of food, drinks and refreshments to their permanent members and their guests upon payment. Different applications have been moved in respect of notices, orders and/or actions for different assessment years. As similar questions of fact and law are involved in all these applications, those were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Controversies involved in the present applications arise out of a conflict between settled legal concepts of sale and persistent effort by the Revenue to extend the meaning of sale by creating legal fictions through legislative interventions in order to widen the tax net and to augment revenue. The controversies are old one having different facets and ramifications. Although some aspects of the legal problem have ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2007)10VST490NULL
1. The petitioner herein carries on business of reselling various types of spices and is a registered dealer under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in short, "the 1994 Act"). The petitioner has moved this Tribunal against seizure of his goods under Section 70 of the 1994 Act and imposition of penalty under Section 71 of the Act of 1994. In course of his business the petitioner placed an order with M/s. Ghanashyam Trading Co., of Unjha for supply of 10,000 bags of jeera (hereinafter referred to as "the disputed goods"). The petitioner obtained a way-bill from the assessing authority of Purulia Charge. The aforesaid supplier sent to the petitioner a copy of the invoice and consignment note to facilitate filling up of the way-bill for entering the State of West Bengal. Way-bill was accordingly filled up and handed over to the petitioner's agent at Sarbari More Check-post for production before the check-post authorities at the time when the vehicle carrying the disputed goods would re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2007)9VST573NULL
1. The petitioner, a company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956 and a registered dealer under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act of 1994") and also under the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as, "the VAT Act") placed an order termed as purchase order dated November 8, 1997 with Texmaco Ltd., respondent No. 3 for manufacturing and supplying three oxygen buffer vessels (hereinafter referred to as, "the vessels") under an agreement entered into for the purpose. It appears from the agreement that some raw materials required for manufacturing those vessels were supplied by the petitioner and the vessels were manufactured by respondent No. 3 as per the design furnished by the petitioner. After manufacture Texmaco delivered those vessels to the petitioner by three invoices and charged sales tax on the entire invoice price at three per cent subject to submission of declaration forms. The petitioner also paid the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2007)8VST258NULL
1. The petitioner, M/s. Shree Ram Saw Mill, is a partnership firm and a registered dealer under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1994"). The petitioner-firm holds an eligibility certificate issued under Section 39 of the Act of 1994 valid from May 14, 2000 to May 13, 2007. The place of business of the petitioner-firm is at 16, P. T. R. Siding, Howrah, within the area under Shibpur Charge.2. By an amendment, Sub-section (4) along with a proviso and Explanation was inserted in Section 39, with effect from April 1, 2003 in the Act of 1994. The said proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 39 has put a limit to the benefit of exemption from payment of tax. The said proviso has provided, inter alia, that a dealer shall cease to enjoy such exemption from the day immediately following the day on which the aggregate of the benefit of exemption from payment of tax enjoyed by the dealer under this section, computed from the day of coming into force of thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sales Tax Tribunal STT West Bengal
Reported in : (2008)12VST287NULL
1. M/s. Siliguri Battery Company, the petitioner herein, was a registered dealer under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 at the material point of time. The petitioner-company filed returns for the year 1993-94 (April 1993 to March 1994) in time. Return for the last quarter was filed on April 12, 1994. Before initiation of any assessment proceeding the petitioner filed a revised return on May 10, 1994 disclosing certain sales not included in the original returns and paid sales tax on the basis of the revised return. Subsequently assessment proceeding for the aforementioned year 1993-94 was initiated on December 7, 1994 and an assessment order was passed on April 10, 1995. The assessing authority, being the Commercial Tax Officer, Siliguri Charge (in short, "the CTO") accepted returns filed by the petitioner and found that the petitioner paid Rs. 3,841.45 in excess of the payable sales tax. Demand notice in form VII along with copy of the aforesaid assessment order was sent and s...
Tag this Judgment!