Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. We heard the arguments of the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record.

7. It is the case of the respondent/assessee that they are authorised distributors of Ambassador cars for Madras and the Districts of Nellore and Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State under the Motor Cars (Distribution and Sale) Control Order issued under the Essential Commodities Act and it is the further case of the respondent that they have separate branches in Nellore and Chittoor. Orders were booked at the respective branches and the payments from the customers are received by the respective branches. The various documents maintained at the branches would prove that the cars were delivered after registration either at Nellore or Chittoor, as the case may be. Further, the various vouchers show that the cars were delivered to the customers by the respective branches and therefore the turnover were sales of cars outside the State of Tamil Nadu, not taxable under the State Act or C.S.T. The said case of the respondent was rejected by the Assessing Authority on the ground that the dealers received the cars at Madras undertook the work of registration by obtaining necessary documents from the purchaser. The registration work was prior to delivery of cars and the cars were delivered at Madras to the concerned purchaser. Hence, the movement of cars to Chittoor and Nellore did not arise and the sales amount to local sale within the State of Tamil Nadu.

9. This reasoning of the Assessing Officer, which has been confirmed by the Appellate Authority, has been reversed by the Tribunal, the highest fact finding authority by recording reasons as follows:

"Assessment cannot be made on presumption. It must be established that the goods in respect of this turnover moved to places outside the State as a result of the sale. Absolutely there is no proof regarding this. The finding of the Assessing Officer that it can be safely presumed that inasmuch as proof of delivery of the goods at Madras is lacking in respect of the disputed turnover they should have been moved to places outside the State as a result of the sale cannot hold good. If there is lack of proof in one angle, it cannot be shifted to the other angle. The Department must establish that this turnover attracted assessment under CST. It is significant to note that the goods were sold in Andhra Pradesh and sales tax has been paid in Andhra Pradesh. The appellant has also given objections to the notice stating that the appellants were assessed to sales tax by the State of Andhra Pradesh and all the items covered in the pre-assessment notice proposed to be assessed in the State of Tamil Nadu, have been included in the assessment made in the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Andhra Pradesh authorities had taken the view that the transactions are assessable at Andhra Pradesh State and accordingly they assessed the turnover in the State of Andhra Pradesh and as such there was no intention to evade payment of tax and the entire transactions are recorded in their books of accounts. The appellants have also stated that they have opened separate branches Nellore/Chittoor and orders were booked by the respective branches and the branches were registered under the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act, having registration numbers and independent character and payments were made by the customers in their respective branches and entered in the accounts maintained there and the cars were delivered from Nellore/Chittoor branches to the customers and the turnovers were reported by the branches in the State of Andhra Pradesh. So it is seen from the records that these transactions have been assessed as local sales under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act and proper accounts are also maintained by their branch offices Nellore/Chittoor. So it cannot be stated that the turnovers liable for assessment under CST Act. There is lack of proof with regard to delivery of the goods at Madras. There are no documents to establish that the goods in respect of the turnovers moved to places outside the State as a result of sale. Absolutely there is no proof that the turnover is liable for assessment under CST Act. Hence, we find that the assessment made on the disputed turnovers under the CST Act is not sustainable and it is liable to be set aside."

(Italics by us)

10. We also find that there is absolutely no material to prove that the cars are moved in pursuance of a contract of sale at Nellore or Chittoor so as to bring the disputed transaction under inter-State transaction. It is not the case of the petitioner that the documents unearthed during the inspection proved that particular number of cars were booked at Nellore/Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State and pursuant to that booking, the same number of cars were moved from Madras office of the respondent to the Branch Office at Nellore/Chittoor so as to rope in those transactions within the ambit of Section 3(a) of the C.S.T. Act. The reasoning given by the authorities is that the assesses claimed exemption over a turnover of Rs.77,10,048/- as sales outside the State and out of which a turnover of Rs.25,466-71ps related to sale of spare parts out of the balance turnover of Rs.76,84,581-59ps, a turnover in Rs.49,64,090-24ps has been proved to be local sales at Madras and remaining turnover of Rs.27,20,491-35ps presumed to be inter-State transaction. We cannot approve this sort of presumption to the turnover under C.S.T. No other materials are made available before us except the orders of the authorities under the Sales Tax Act. In the absence of any other materials made available to us so as to take a different view than the one taken by the Appellate Tribunal, we refrained ourselves from interfering with the order under revision.

13. In respect of the TNGST assessment, the Special Tribunal has upheld the order of the Appellate Tribunal by recording reasons to the following effect:

"We have examined the rival submissions and perused the records produced before us. We find considerable force in the contention of Mr. V. Ramachandran, counsel for the assessee. One cannot forget the fact during the years 1969-70 and 1970-71 only Ambassador Cars were available and there was always a long queue of purchasers. Naturally people wanted to get priority by booking through lean centres like Nellore and Chithoor. The evidence no doubt discloses that people in Madras and other places gave addresses in Nellore or Chittoor to book cars. It is not disputed that the cars were taken to Nellore and Chithoor to register them in the name of the applicants. It is not disputed that sales tax was paid in Andhra Pradesh State. To complete the formality the assessee took on themselves the formality of registration etc. and then brought back the cars to Madras to physically deliver them to the parties. This is an arrangement between the parties to get over the Control Order. But legally, the cars were sold in Nellore or Chithoor where the registration took the Motor Vehicles Act took place. The persons who booked the cars from those centres became owners. Thereafter it was only an arrangement to bring the cars to Madras and it will not have any relevance to the contract of sale. It will be appropriate at this stage to look at the statement of the Manager, Mr. M.K. Hussain.