Madras High Court
M/S. Konica Minolta Business vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) on 30 June, 2016
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 30.06.2016 Coram The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam Writ Petition Nos.12331 and 12332 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2014 M/s. Konica Minolta Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Authorized Signatory Mr.JPR Charles, No.1/368, Kamaraj Salai, Mathur, Manali, Chennai - 600 068. ...Petitioner in both W.Ps. Vs. 1. The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Kuralagam Annexe, First Floor, Chennai - 600 108. 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. ...Respondents 1 and 2 in both W.Ps. Prayer in W.P.No.12331 of 2014 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records of the first respondent, in TIN 33071087423/2011-12, and to quash the impugned proceedings dated 09.04.2014, and further, to direct the first respondent not to levy or collect tax on the sales of multifunction printer, at more than 4% till 11.7.2011, and 5% from 12.07.2011, following the proceedings issued by the second respondent in Audit Cell 1/ 13543/2012, dated 28.03.2012. and Prayer in W.P.No.12332 of 2014 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for records of the second respondent, in in Audit Cell 1/ 13543/2012, and to quash the impugned proceedings, dated 28.03.2013, as ultra vires, and unreasonable, contrary to the principles of natural justice, and to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. In both W.Ps. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sundareswaran For Respondents : Mr.S.Manoharan Sundaram Additional Government Pleader COMMON O R D E R
The petitioner is a registered dealer, on the files of the respondent, under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and they have filed these Writ Petitions, challenging the proceedings, dated 09.04.2014 and 28.03.2013, passed by the first and second respondent respectively.
2. The learned counsels appearing on either side agree that the legal issue has been answered by the Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling, in ACAAR No.122/2013-14, dated 02.09.2014, wherein, it has been held as follows:-
" The clarification, based on the above observations, may, therefore, be that Digital Multifunction Devices useable as peripherals to a compute system are liable to tax at the rate of 5% under Entry in Serial No.68 of Par-B of the first Schedule read with Item 22 (a) in the list of Information Technology Products as notified by the Government vide Notification No.II (1)/CTR/(A-6)/2007 in G.O.Ms.No.3 CT & R (B1) Department, dated 01.01.2007."
3. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are allowed, the impugned orders are set aside, and the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment, after taking into consideration of the Rulings given by the Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling, referred above. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
30.06.2016 sd Index : yes/no To
1. The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Kuralagam Annexe, First Floor, Chennai - 600 108.
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
sd Writ Petition Nos.12331 & 12332 of 2014 30.06.2016