Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act and they have obtained import and export code in the State of Tamil Nadu for import of necessary goods for Andhra Pradesh Government's project from the Chennai Sea and Airport.

4. The modus adopted by the petitioner is that their administrative office at Chennai, places purchase order on the foreign importer and its joint venture over seas partner for the goods and materials required for the Andhra Pradesh project. The foreign exporter raises invoices on the petitioner with the address at Chennai and the goods are consigned to the project site at West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh. The payment are stated to be made online from their centralized accounting system.

7. The petitioner has submitted a reply contending that the import and export code was taken in Chennai, the purchase order was issued from the administrative office at Chennai, and was given only for the purpose of issuing purchase order and movement of imported materials from the port after following the IEC formalities. Therefore, it is submitted that the question of obtaining registration under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act by the petitioner does not arise, as the goods imported are directly moving to the project site at Andhra Pradesh and there is no sale involved in the transaction.

11. The allegation that there is a sale between the petitioner's liaison office in Chennai and the project office in Andhra Pradesh is absolutely false and it is against the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indure & Co.(34 VST 590) and English Electric Co.(38 VST 475). Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned order is unsustainable.

12. Learned Additional Government Pleader, by referring to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, has submitted that the petitioner is an unregistered dealer in the State of Tamil Nadu and therefore, the goods were detained and there is evasion of tax to the State of Tamil Nadu. Therefore the respondent was fully justified in passing the impugned order. It is further submitted that the details of the certificate, Import Export Code registration was gathered from the IEC gate website. Therefore, it is seen that the registration was obtained by the petitioner's Head Office located at Chennai, Tamil Nadu State.

13. The stand taken by the petitioner is that the liaison office alone is at Chennai cannot be accepted as all accommodations were done at Chennai and they are not registered dealer under the Tamil nadu Value Added Tax Act and they are using the Chennai address for import purpose and obtained Import Export Code. The Bankers are located in Ramapuram, within the vicinity of the petitioner's Head Office and therefore the transactions is definitely liable to be taxed within the State of Tamil nadu.