Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 2]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs Assist.Commnr.,Sales Tax,Ernakulam ... on 7 January, 2014

²L
                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 764 OF 2004




|Apollo Tyres Ltd.                                |..   Appellant(s)              |



                                   Versus

|Assistant Commissioner Sales Tax, Ernakulam &    |..   Respondent(s)             |
|Ors.                                             |                               |




                                  O R D E R

1. The appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is engaged in the manufacture of automobile tyres and tubes at its factory in the State of Kerela. The appellant is also a registered Dealer both under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (for short, "the KGST Act") and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

2. In view of contravention of Section 5(3)(7) of the KGST Act, a notice had been issued to the assessee by the assessing authority to show cause as to why penalty under Section 45 A(g) of the KGST Act should not be imposed. On receipt of the said show cause notice the assessee had filed its reply. The assessing authority after considering the reply so filed by the assessee had passed order dated 08.05.1987. The said order read as under :

"Order No. 23040013/82-83 dated 8-5-1987 In the circumstances explained above, it has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt that the assesses M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd., have contravened the provisions of Section 5(3) (7) of the KGST Act, 1963 by purchasing Carbon black and Rubber chemicals to the tune of Rs.1,64,24,079.10 by issuing form 18 declarations for the period from 12/82 to 3/83. Out of this Rubber chemicals and carbon black for Rs.1,34,79,016/- were utilized for the production of tyres, tubes & flaps transferred to other Branch offices outside the Kerela for sale.
Hence in exercise of the powers conferred on me under section 45A
(g) of the KGST Act, 1963, I impose a penalty of Rs. 11,86,150/- (Rs.

Eleven Lakhs eighty six thousand one hundred and fifty only) being twice the amount of tax sought to be evaded by contravening the provisions of Section 5 (3) (7) of the KGST Act, 1963. This should be paid as specified in the Demand Notice issued.

Sd/-

Asstt. Commissioner (Assessment) -I Special Circle- II, Ernakulam."

3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee had carried the matter unsuccessfully before the First Appellant Authority, Board of Revenue and the High Court.

4. Aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court, the assessee is before us.

5. We have heard Shri Sanjay Hegde and Shri Ramesh Babu M.R., learned counsel for the Revenue. We have also perused the order(s) passed by the First Appellate Authority, Board of Revenue and the High Court.

6. After going through the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Courts below, we are fully convinced that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) which would call for our interference.

7. The civil appeal is dismissed accordingly.

....................J. [ H.L. DATTU ] ....................J. [ DIPAK MISRA ] ....................J. [ S.A. BOBDE ] NEW DELHI, JANUARY 07, 2014.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 764 OF 2004 |Apollo Tyres Ltd. |.. Appellant(s) | Versus |Assistant Commissioner Sales Tax, Ernakulam & |.. Respondent(s) | |Ors. | | O R D E R

1. The appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is engaged in the manufacture of automobile tyres and tubes at its factory in the State of Kerela. The appellant is also a registered Dealer both under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (for short, "the KGST Act") and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

2. In view of contravention of Section 5(3)(7) of the KGST Act, a notice had been issued to the assessee by the assessing authority to show cause as to why penalty under Section 45 A(g) of the KGST Act should not be imposed. On receipt of the said show cause notice the assessee had filed its reply. The assessing authority after considering the reply so filed by the assessee had passed order dated 08.05.1987. The said order read as under :

"Order No. 23040013/82-83 dated 8-5-1987 In the circumstances explained above, it has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt that the assesses M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd., have contravened the provisions of Section 5(3) (7) of the KGST Act, 1963 by purchasing Carbon black and Rubber chemicals to the tune of Rs.1,64,24,079.10 by issuing form 18 declarations for the period from 12/82 to 3/83. Out of this Rubber chemicals and carbon black for Rs.1,34,79,016/- were utilized for the production of tyres, tubes & flaps transferred to other Branch offices outside the Kerela for sale.
Hence in exercise of the powers conferred on me under section 45A
(g) of the KGST Act, 1963, I impose a penalty of Rs. 11,86,150/- (Rs.

Eleven Lakhs eighty six thousand one hundred and fifty only) being twice the amount of tax sought to be evaded by contravening the provisions of Section 5 (3) (7) of the KGST Act, 1963. This should be paid as specified in the Demand Notice issued.

Sd/-

Asstt. Commissioner (Assessment) -I Special Circle- II, Ernakulam."

3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee had carried the matter unsuccessfully before the First Appellant Authority, Board of Revenue and the High Court.

4. Aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court, the assessee is before us.

5. We have heard Shri Sanjay Hegde and Shri Ramesh Babu M.R., learned counsel for the Revenue. We have also perused the order(s) passed by the First Appellate Authority, Board of Revenue and the High Court.

6. After going through the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Courts below, we are fully convinced that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) which would call for our interference.

7. The civil appeal is dismissed accordingly.

....................J. [ H.L. DATTU ] ....................J. [ DIPAK MISRA ] ....................J. [ S.A. BOBDE ] NEW DELHI, JANUARY 07, 2014.

   ITEM NO.108                   COURT NO.3              SECTION IIIA




                 S U P R E M E    C O U R T   O F    I N D I A
                               RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


                         CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 764 OF 2004




   APOLLO TYRES LTD.                                      Appellant (s)


                      VERSUS


   ASSIST.COMMNR.,SALES TAX,ERNAKULAM &ORS.               Respondent(s)


   (With office report)


   Date: 07/01/2014    This Appeal was called on for hearing today.


   CORAM :
             HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU
             HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
             HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE


   For Appellant(s)     Mr. Sanjay R Hegde, Adv.
                        Mr. S. Nithin, Adv.
                      for Mr. M.P. Vinod,Adv.




For Respondent(s)Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The civil appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.

           |      [ Charanjeet Kaur ]              | |        [ Vinod Kulvi ]       |
|Court Master                           | |Asstt. Registrar                     |




                [ Signed order is placed on the file ]



-----------------------
9

9