Disputed tax liability and place of sale require factual assessment, not writ adjudication, under VAT law.

Disputed questions of fact governing VAT liability, including the place of sale, delivery, transfer of custody and title, and the contractual incidence of tax, are not fit for writ adjudication and must be examined by the assessing authority on the available records. The court noted that liability to purchase tax under Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, 2006 cannot be shifted merely by contractual arrangements, and that the legal effect of such agreements depends on factual determination. The writ petitions were therefore not entertained on merits, and the issues of VAT levy and purchase tax incidence were left open for statutory assessment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petitions challenging the notices for levy and recovery of VAT on crude oil supply could be entertained when the dispute turned on factual questions arising from the agreements and the place of sale. (ii) Whether the liability to pay purchase tax under Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, 2006 and the incidence of tax between seller and buyer could be determined in writ proceedings.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petitions challenging the notices for levy and recovery of VAT on crude oil supply could be entertained when the dispute turned on factual questions arising from the agreements and the place of sale.

Analysis: The claim of the petitioners was that the crude oil transactions took place outside the State and in the Exclusive Economic Zone, while the revenue asserted that the sale and delivery occurred within the State. The court noted that the taxability depended on the construction of the production sharing and crude oil sale agreements, the delivery point, the transfer of custody and title, and the factual location of the sale. Such questions could not be resolved on the writ side and required examination by the assessing authority on the available records.

Conclusion: The issue was left to be determined by the assessing authority, and no writ relief was granted on this question.

Issue (ii): Whether the liability to pay purchase tax under Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, 2006 and the incidence of tax between seller and buyer could be determined in writ proceedings.

Analysis: The agreements showed contractual arrangements regarding payment and reimbursement of taxes, but the court held that an agreement could not by itself shift the statutory burden of tax. Whether purchase tax was payable under Section 12, whether the buyer could be treated as liable, and whether the arrangement created any tax consequence were all dependent on disputed facts and the legal effect of the contracts. Those matters required adjudication by the assessing officer and could not be conclusively decided in the writ petitions.

Conclusion: The purchase tax issue was not decided on merits in writ jurisdiction and was left open for determination by the assessing authority.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were not entertained on merits because the controversy depended on disputed factual and contractual questions relating to the place of sale and tax incidence, which were required to be examined by the assessing authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Disputed questions of fact affecting tax liability, especially those arising from contractual arrangements and the place of sale, are not fit for adjudication in writ proceedings and must be left to the statutory assessing authority.

---