2014 (2) TMI 101

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....General Sales Tax Act, 1959 [TNGST Act]. 2. The facts, which are relevant for the disposal of this appeal are as follows: The assessee is a registered dealer on the file of the Commercial Tax Officer, Coimbatore. They owned estates in the State of Kerala and the agricultural produce received by them from their own land located in the State of Kerala are being transported and disposed of in the State of Tamil Nadu. In this process, the assessee claimed to have disposed of Cardamom and coffee as the agricultural produce and claimed exemption in respect of such disposal, during the assessment year 1994-95. The Assessing Officer, rejected the claim stating that they are not entitled for the exemption as exemption under Section 2(r) of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssment. This is how the assessee is before this Court by way of this appeal. 3. We have heard Mr.N.Inbarajan, learned counsel appearing for the assessee and Mr.N.Manokar Sundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) for the State. 4. Learned counsel for the assessee by placing reliance on the decision of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal in the assessee's own case reported in (1999) 114 STC 449 [cited supra] submitted that the Special Tribunal has held that if the definition of turnover is reflected only to the produce grown within the State, it would amount to discrimination. However, the learned counsel produced copies of the statement of details of raw coffee sold during the year 1994-95; copy of Form No.26 under t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of such exemption to similar other agricultural products of other States, when sold in Tamil Nadu amounts to discrimination against the out-State agricultural products, which is prohibited by Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the Special Tribunal held that the words "within the State" occurring in section 2(r) of the Act offend Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution and therefore, the said words "within the State" being violative and ultra vires has been struck down. 7. Therefore, the finding of the Special Tribunal in the instant case that merely because the agricultural products was brought from other State and therefore, not entitled for exemption cannot be countenanced. On the other hand, it has to be ta....