TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (4) TMI 294
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....958. The petitioner carries on the business of manufacturing chemicals, viz., refined naphthalene balls, solvent naphtha, naphthalene powder, synthetic resins, etc. The raw materials utilised by the petitioner for manufacturing the above chemicals are coal-tar, other coal-tar by-products, rosin, dephenolised oil, sulphuric acid, caustic soda, etc. The periods with which we are concerned in this petition are 1st April, 1971, to 31st March, 1972, and 1st April, 1972, to 31st March, 1973. The petitioner purchased the raw materials mentioned above within the State against declarations in form XII-A at a concessional rate of tax under section 8(1) of the State Act. The petitioner also purchased raw materials from outside the State against declar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing penalty are that the petitioner purchased raw materials of the value of Rs. 2,44,580.66 against declarations in form XII-A within the State. The petitioner also purchased raw materials of the value of Rs. 2,02,806.51 against declarations in C form from outside the State. The manufactured goods of the value of Rs. 2,93,265.40 were sold outside the State. The estimated value of raw materials used for the manufactured goods sold outside the State is Rs. 1,15,000. On these facts, the Sales Tax Officer as also the Deputy Commissioner came to the conclusion that the raw materials which were used in manufacturing goods which were sold outside the State must be taken to be those raw materials which were purchased within the State by the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ture of other goods for sale in the State of Madhya Pradesh or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce or in the course of export out of the territory of India. The burden to prove that the penalty has been incurred in any particular case by contravention of the purpose for which the raw materials were purchased under sub-section (1) is on the department. It may be that the department is able to discharge that burden in some cases by calling upon the dealer to show as to how the goods purchased under sub-section (1) were utilised by him. In the instant case, however, on the facts found by the Sales Tax Officer, it cannot be said that the burden is discharged for the entire quantity of manufactured goods sold outside the State could b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....93 01. The petitioner had purchased raw materials of the value of Rs. 3,58,907.65 from outside the State. The petitioner had made local purchases of raw materials against declarations in form XII-A under section 8(1) of the value of Rs. 8,50,633.38. The finding of the Sales Tax Officer is that raw materials of the value of Rs. 8,00,000 were used in manufacture of goods which were sold outside the State. As mentioned above, the petitioner had purchased raw materials of the value of Rs. 3,58,907.65 from outside the State. These raw materials could have been utilised in the manufacture of goods which were sold outside the State without contravention of any law. Deducting this amount from the amount of Rs. 8,00,000, it follows that the raw m....