TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (11) TMI 839
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sale. The point in controversy is the disallowance of turnover in a sum of Rs. 12,22,374 as the consignment sale which claim was rejected by the assessing officer and treated the transaction as inter-State sale falling under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, is correct or not. The brief facts leading to the case in a nutshell are hereunder: The respondent is a dealer in iron and steel and an assessee on the file of the Commercial Tax Officer, Thudiyalur Assessment Circle, Coimbatore. In respect of the assessment year 1991-92, the respondent was assessed on a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 19,27,303 as against the reported total and taxable turnover of Rs. 19,27,303 and Rs. 7,04,929, respectively in the Central sales tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epartment also filed an enhancement petition for restoration of the order of the assessing officer which has been taken on file as T.C.M.P. No. 95 of 1994. The assessing officer came to the conclusion on the basis that the entire goods sent as consignment were sold within a day or two in other States which cannot be done unless or otherwise there is a pre-existing purchase order for the goods. Thus, the entire transaction was treated as an interState sale falling under section 3(a) of the CST Act. The first appellate authority has deleted four transactions for which the assessee was able to file the proof of having unloaded the goods in the place of business of the agent at Palakkad in Kerala. It is seen from the order of the Tribunal tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....exemption more so in the absence of any incriminating document to prove the contrary coupled with the evidence produced by the assessee. The Appellate Tribunal was also pleased to hold that the assessee has produced the documents required under rule 4(3A) of the Central Sales Tax (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1957, such as the declaration under form F, pattials, stock statement rendered by the agent along with other details required by the assessing officer. Yet another document that was considered by the Appellate Tribunal was the copy of the sale bills issued in the other States and the agreement entered into between the agents of the assessee with the purchaser. The accounts of the agents were also verified and they indicate that the loading and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in [1994] 95 STC 273 (Mad) the honourable High Court was pleased to hold that the burden of proof is on the assessee to prove to the satisfaction of the assessing officer that particulars furnished in form F are true and a genuine. The said issue was also confirmed by the subsequent judgment of the Division Bench in A. Dhandapani v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in [1995] 96 STC 98 (Mad) wherein also the Division Bench was pleased to hold that it is for the dealer to prove that the particulars mentioned in form F are true. Therefore, a reading of the above judgments would indicate that in the present case on hand, the assessee has proved with documentary evidence before the authorities that the particulars furnished by him are true and ge....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee to its agents and therefore, the same is not an inter-State sale. The issue can be looked into from another angle as well. As observed above, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as the Appellate Tribunal have considered the entire records available and the documents have been verified by the Department Representative as well. Hence orders have been passed by the appellate authorities on a consideration of the materials available on record. Therefore, when orders have been passed by the Appellate Tribunal confirming the order of the first appellate authority based upon the materials available on record, this court exercising the power under article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot go into the merits of the said de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mployed by the High Court in its judgment goes to show that the High Court has exercised its certiorari jurisdiction for correcting the judgment of the appellate court. In Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai [2003] 6 SCC 675 this court has ruled that to be amenable to correction in certiorari jurisdiction, the error committed by the court or authority on whose judgment the High Court was exercising jurisdiction, should be an error which is self-evident. An error which needs to be established by lengthy and complicated arguments or by indulging in a long-drawn process of reasoning, cannot possibly be an error available for correction by writ of certiorari. If it is reasonably possible to form two opinions on the same material, the finding arriv....