Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. The Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited [for short 'BPCL'] (petitioner in connected Petition - Writ Petition No. 10239 of 2018) filed DDQ application in the year 1992. In exercise of his jurisdiction under section 52 of Bombay Sales Tax Act (for short 'BST Act'), the second respondent - Commissioner of Sales Tax passed order dated 11/09/2006 determining the disputed question. The question under dispute was 'whether return stream i.e. return of kerosene by Reliance Industries Ltd (for short 'RIL') to BPCL would be legally allowable as "goods returned" or whether that return will amount to purchase of kerosene by BPCL from RIL. The application for DDQ was filed by BPCL. In terms of agreement dated 24/08/1992 entered into by and between BPCL and RIL, it was agreed that BPCL shall provide to RIL, through a dedicated pipeline, kerosene to enable RIL to remove/extract N-Paraffin/Special cut kerosene for

911. wp 2795.18.doc manufacture of Linear Alkyl Benzene (for short 'LAB'). RIL, in turn, under the agreement was obliged to return the same kerosene confirming to BIS standard to the supplier BPCL.

6. Thus, BPCL by filing the determination application on 21/04/1992, requested the Commissioner- respondent No.2 to determine the following three questions :

(a) Whether sale of KO (LABFS) by BPCL to RIL (vide sale invoice no. 000900 dated 25th April 1992 is liable to tax.

(b) Whether the return stream i.e. return of Kerosene by the RIL to BPCL (vide sales return credit note no. 147857 dated 1st May 1992) would be legally allowable as sales return or whether that return will amount to purchase of Kerosene by BPCL from RIL.

(c) Whether subsequent sale of kerosene effected by BPCL (vide sale invoice no. 357494 dated 21st May 1992) out of return stream is liable to tax.

8. The Second question was also answered in favour of RIL and BPCL holding that transaction of return of kerosene by RIL to BPCL amounts to 'return of goods' by RIL to BPCL in terms of rule 4 of the BST rules and not sale.

9. Several rounds of litigation thereafter ensued. Suffice it to observe that it was for the first and last time in the history of Bombay Sales Tax Act, DDQ by Commissioner was challenged by the State before the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal ('MSTT' for short). The MSTT by order dated 20 th January 2015 overruled the order of the Commissioner and held that the return stream of kerosene was not a 'return of goods'