Madras High Court
Tanfac Industries Limited vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 1 September, 2016
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.09.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
W.P.Nos.12187 to 12189 of 2005
and
Connected Miscellaneous Petitions
TANFAC Industries Limited
5/C, II Street, Dr.R.K.Salai
Chennai 600 004. .. Petitioner in all WP's
..Vs..
1.The Commercial Tax Officer
Luz Assessment Circle
No.46, Greenways Road
Chennai 600 028.
2.The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) IV
Kuralagam Annexe, VI Floor
Chennai 600 108.
3.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep by Secretary to Government
Department of Commercial Taxes
and Religious Endowments
Fort St.George
Chennai 600 009.
4.The Commercial Tax Officer I
Pondicherry
5.Union Territory of Pondicherry
Rep by the Secretary
Department of Revenue
Pondicherry
6.Union of India
Represented by the Secretary
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
New Delhi. .. Respondents in all WPs
Prayer in W.P.No.12187/2004:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Union Territory of Pondicherry, the fifth respondent herein to transfer to the credit of the first and third respondents herein against central sales tax demands of the first respondent herein, the taxes paid by the petitioners on their sales of aluminium fluoride during the period 1.4.1989 to 31.3.1991 from their stock point at Kanniakoil, Pondicherry in respect of which taxes have been assessed and realised by the authorities of the fifth respondent herein under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
Prayer in W.P.No.12188/2004:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent herein in A.P.No.CST.105/2000 (1990-91) dated 30.09.2002 and quash the proceedings of the second respondent herein in A.P.No.CST.105/2000 (1990-91) dated 30.09.2002 confirming the proceedings of the first respondent in CST.No.581483/1990-91 dated 10.03.2000 and directing the first respondent to grant refunds of Central Sales Tax paid by the petitioners on the transfer of stock of Aluminum Fluoride made by the petitioners' factory at No.14, SIPTCOT Industrial complex, Cuddalore 607 005 to their stock point at Kanniakoil, Union Terriroty of Pondicherry.
Prayer in W.P.No.12189/2004:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent herein in A.P.No.CST.104/2000 (1989-90) dated 30.09.2002 and quash the proceedings of the second respondent herein in A.P.No.CST.104/2000 (1989-90) dated 30.09.2002 confirming the proceedings of the first respondent in CST.No.581483/1989-90 dated 06.03.2000 and directing the first respondent to grant refunds of Central Sales Tax paid by the petitioners on the transfer of stock of Aluminum Fluoride made by the petitioners' factory at No.14, SIPTCOT Industrial complex, Cuddalore 607 005 to their stock point at Kanniakoil, Union Terriroty of Pondicherry.
For Petitioner
in all WP's : Mr.Parthasarathy,
for Mr.N.Prasad
For Respondents
in all WP's : Ms.Vasudha Thiagarajan, A.G.P.,
COMMON ORDER
Heard Mr.Parthasarathy, learned counsel assisted by Mr.N.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Vasudha Thiagarajan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2.The petitioner has filed three writ petitions. W.P.No.12187/2005 seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Union Territory of Pondicherry, the 5th respondent to transfer to the credit of the first and third respondents herein against central sales tax demands of the first respondent herein, the taxes paid by the petitioners on their sales of aluminium fluoride during the period 1.4.1989 to 31.3.1991 from their stock point at Kanniakoil, Pondicherry in respect of which taxes have been assessed and realised by the authorities of the fifth respondent herein under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
3.W.P.Nos.12188 and 12189 of 2005 have been filed challenging the orders passed by the first appellate authority in respect of the assessments for the years 1989-90 and 1990-91 under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
4.Though several grounds have been raised in these writ petitions, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in the light of the subsequent amendment to the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 inserting a separate procedure and creating a Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority, the petitioner proposes to go before the said authority, in the light of the fact that the dispute is an inter-state dispute with regard to the goods in question.
5.In this regard, the learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to Section 18A, 19, 20 and 22(1B) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, in order to explain the scheme created under the Act for resolution of the dispute. It is further submitted that in terms of sub-section 1 of Section 20, an appeal shall lie to the authority against any order passed by the highest appellate authority of a State under the Act determining issues relating to stock transfers of consignment of goods, in so far as it involves the dispute of inter-state nature.
6.Therefore, to enable the petitioner to approach the Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority, the petitioner has to first prefer an appeal to the highest appellate authority of the State. The highest appellate authority of the State is Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. In the normal course, the impugned orders passed by the first appellate authority dated 30.09.2002 is appellable to the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. But in the year 2005, the petitioner thought fit to file writ petitions because in one of the writ petitions they have prayed for a direction to the Union Territory of Puducherry to transfer the credit of the first and third respondents herein against central sales tax demands of the first respondent herein, the taxes paid by the petitioners on their sales of aluminium fluoride during the period 1.4.1989 to 31.3.1991 from their stock point at Kanniakoil, Pondicherry in respect of which taxes have been assessed and realised by the fifth respondent herein under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
7.I have heard the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on the above submissions.
8.Taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the amendment which has been brought about to the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, these writ petitions are disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and if such an appeal is filed within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the appellate tribunal shall entertain the appeal without reference to the limitation, in the light of the fact that these writ petitions are pending since 2005 and the petitioner seeks to work out his remedies under the provisions of the amended Act.
9.With these observations, these writ petitions are disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
01.09.2016 pgp Note: Registry is directed to return the original impugned orders.
To
1.The Commercial Tax Officer Luz Assessment Circle No.46, Greenways Road Chennai 600 028.
2.The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) IV Kuralagam Annexe, VI Floor Chennai 600 108.
3.The Secretary to Government Department of Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments The State of Tamil Nadu Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.
4.The Commercial Tax Officer I Pondicherry
5.The Secretary Department of Revenue Union Territory of Pondicherry Pondicherry
6.The Secretary Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Union of India New Delhi.
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J pgp W.P.Nos.12187 to 12189 of 2005 Dated : 01.09.2016