2006 (8) TMI 576 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court affirms Tribunal's decision on tax liability, interest chargeability, and exemption form, ruling against applicant.

KB. Bone Mills Versus Commissioner of Trade Tax, UP., Lucknow

The court dismissed all issues raised in the revisions, affirming the Tribunal's decision on tax liability for the sale of crushed bone, interest ... - Issues:1. Interest chargeability under the Central Sales Tax Act.2. Liability for payment of tax on specific goods.3. Interpretation of goods sold and subsequent documentation.4. Opportunity to furnish 'C' form for tax exemption.Analysis:1. The first issue raised in the revisions pertains to the levy of interest under the Central Sales Tax Act. The applicant argued that interest should not be charged based on a Supreme Court decision. However, the court noted that the Finance Act, 2000 amended section 9 of the Act with retrospective effect, allowing for interest to be demanded. The court referenced a previous case, Kajaria Ceramics Limited v. State of U.P., where this amendment was upheld, concluding that interest can indeed be charged under the Act.2. The second issue revolves around the liability for payment of tax on specific goods, namely bone meal and bone meal powder. The applicant claimed exemption based on a notification, but the assessing authority determined that crushed bone was sold instead of bone meal. This decision was supported by evidence of stock found during a survey and a letter from the purchaser confirming the purchase of crushed bone. The court upheld the Tribunal's finding that the applicant had indeed sold crushed bone, making them liable for tax.3. The third issue concerns the interpretation of goods sold and subsequent documentation provided by the purchaser. The applicant contended that they had supplied bone meal, not crushed bone. However, the court emphasized that the description provided by the applicant was not decisive, especially when contrary evidence existed. The letter from the purchaser and corresponding purchase orders clearly indicated the sale of crushed bone, leading to the Tribunal's decision being upheld.4. The final issue raised was the opportunity to furnish a 'C' form for tax exemption. The applicant argued that they should have been given a chance to provide the form, citing a Supreme Court decision. However, the court ruled that this argument was not raised before the Tribunal and, therefore, did not warrant consideration. The lack of a request for the form meant there was no obligation on the Tribunal to provide an opportunity for its submission.In conclusion, the court found no merit in any of the issues raised in the revisions and dismissed all three, affirming the Tribunal's decision regarding the liability for tax on the sale of crushed bone, the chargeability of interest under the Act, and the lack of necessity for providing an opportunity to furnish the 'C' form.