TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (5) TMI 455
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....capement of turnover? (ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, sales tax can or cannot be levied on the material supplied free of cost during warranty period? (iii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, additional sales tax can or cannot be levied on spares supplied/used during warranty on account of difference on rate of tax on tractor and its spares? (iv) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, interest under section 25(5) can or cannot be charged? (v) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, tax can or cannot be levied on sales against a valid and genuine ST-15 declaration where the purchaser is not even a dealer for the same? (vi) Whether, on the facts and ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de order dated July 17, 1987, the Assessing Authority accepted the contention of the assessee and did not levy any tax on the value of lubricants utilised for free service of tractors and also the spare parts used for replacement during the warranty period. The revisional authority with a view to consider the legality of the order passed by the assessing authority, initiated proceedings under section 40 of the Act and vide order dated January 23, 1989 created an additional demand of Rs. 11,395 which included tax of Rs. 6,838 and interest of Rs. 4,556. The order passed by the revisional authority was challenged by the petitioner by way of appeal before the Tribunal which was rejected vide order dated November 30, 1989. Even application of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uo motu action with respect to the assessment years much prior to the date of issuance of the aforesaid notice is indicative, suggestive of the fact and strengthens the case of the petitioners so far as the demand of interest is concerned. Resort to the provisions of section 40 of the Act unambiguously demonstrates that the petitioner had not earlier been held responsible for their tax liability and the revisional authority on its own decided to call for the records of the case supposedly disposed of by the Assessing Authority for the purposes of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of the proceedings or of the orders made therein before passing the order determining the liability of the petitioners to pay the tax. . . . ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tribunal to refer the question of law to this court, authoritative pronouncement by a division Bench of this court is already there in the case of Malik Iron Steel Rolling Mills v. State of Haryana [2002] 126 STC 220. Relevant paras of which are extracted below: "7. It is undoubtedly correct that if the provision is literally construed, it would be right to require the Tribunal to state the case and then take a decision. This would be the normal course. However, in the present case, there is no dispute on facts. The issue of law has been authoritatively decided by the apex court. Should this court still issue a direction to the Tribunal to make a reference to this court? Would it serve any purpose? We think not. It would only mean an avo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roducts [1996] 219 ITR 478 (SC) and Commissioner of Income-tax v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Ltd. [1996] 222 ITR 344 (SC). The honourable Supreme Court had given the decision without directing the High Court to call for the statement of the case. 9.. Undoubtedly, their Lordships have much wider powers than this court. However, it appears that a similar course has also been adopted by the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Maharishi Ved Vigyan Vishwa Vidya Peetham [1998] 232 ITR 170. It was held that it was not imperative to follow the 'unnecessary and cumbersome part of the procedure' which in the opinion of their Lordships was 'directory'. Thus, the court had proceeded to 'straightaway ....