Court grants concessional rate on High Speed Diesel purchases to dealers from neighboring states.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, emphasizing that all dealers were entitled to the concessional rate on High Speed Diesel purchases from neighboring states. The court referenced previous decisions supporting the petitioners' entitlement to the benefit and directed all Assessing Authorities in Tamil Nadu to apply the rationale of the court's decision to pending assessments. A subsequent Writ appeal by the State challenging the decision was dismissed by a Division Bench, affirming the initial ruling in favor of the petitioners. The court instructed the department to take prompt action without imposing any costs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Entitlement to 'C' Forms for purchase of High Speed Diesel from other states for concessional tax benefit.
2. Applicability of court decisions on entitlement to 'C' Forms to all dealers seeking benefit.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the issue of entitlement to 'C' Forms under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the purchase of High Speed Diesel from suppliers in other states to avail concessional tax benefits. The court noted that the petitioners faced difficulties in obtaining 'C' Forms for this purpose. It was acknowledged by both parties that a previous decision by the court favored the assessee in similar cases, citing the case of M/s Ramco Cements Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The court referred to decisions from other High Courts and the Supreme Court that supported the assessee's entitlement to the concessional rate for inter-state sales of High Speed Diesel.

2. The court emphasized that the benefit of the concessional rate on High Speed Diesel purchases from neighboring states through inter-state sales was available to all dealers. The State intended to challenge the decision in the Ramco Cements case, but until then, all Assessing Authorities in Tamil Nadu were directed to apply the rationale of the court's decision to pending assessments. The court criticized the stance of the Assessing Authorities, stating that the benefit of the court's decision should not be limited to only those dealers party to the specific case but should apply to all dealers seeking the benefit, in accordance with the law. The court allowed the writ petitions, instructing immediate action by the department without imposing any costs.

3. Subsequently, the State filed a Writ appeal challenging the decision in the Ramco Cements case, which was dismissed by a Division Bench. The court reiterated its view on the matter, emphasizing the complete identity in facts and law between the cases. As a result, the writ petitions were allowed, and the department was directed to take necessary action promptly without any costs incurred.

---