Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to exclude the tax element from taxable turnover under Explanation 1-A to Section 2(r) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 when the sales bills showed a lump-sum price but the tax component was reflected separately in the books of accounts, and whether the consequential penalty under Section 12(3)(b) was sustainable.
Analysis: The Court applied the principle that deduction of sales tax collected as such is not confined to entries in the sale memo alone and may be proved by other acceptable evidence showing that part of the amount realised represented sales tax. Since the issue in the assessee's own earlier matters had already been decided on the same reasoning, the Tribunal's view that separate disclosure in the invoice was unnecessary if the tax component was evidenced in the accounts was treated as consistent with the governing legal position.
Conclusion: The assessee's claim for notional deduction was rejected and the penalty was upheld; the revision was dismissed.
Final Conclusion: The assessment and penalty made under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act were sustained, and the Tribunal's order in favour of the assessee was interfered with only to the extent that the Revenue's revision failed.
Ratio Decidendi: For claiming deduction of sales tax from turnover, it is sufficient if acceptable evidence shows that tax was collected as such, even where the invoice itself does not separately itemise the tax component.