2010 (11) TMI 875

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ermining the net turnover of Rs. 48,52,540 out of the gross turnover of Rs. 3,96,63,230. The Deputy Commissioner (DC), Commercial Taxes (CT), Visakhapatnam, noticed that the petitioner received an amount of Rs. 68,61,894 as per the trading account, which included truck hire receipts of Rs. 11,76,786. As these receipts were not assessed to tax, the DC proposed to revise the order under section 20(2) of the Act and issued revisional show-cause notice. In response to which, the petitioner sought personal hearing. The same was afforded, during which objections were filed. Considering those objections, by proceedings, dated March 5, 2009, the DC revised the assessment and determined the net turnover of Rs. 59,42,150 assessable to tax. This inclu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner, Trade Tax v. Nand Transport Co. [2008] 16 VST 381 (All), Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Commissioner of Taxes [2009] 22 VST 70 (Gauhati), R.P. Kakoti v. Oil Natural Gas Commission [2009] 22 VST 136 (Gauhati), State of Orissa v. Dredging Corporation of India Ltd. [2009] 25 VST 522 (Orissa), Commissioner, VAT, Trade and Taxes Department v. International Travel House Ltd. [2009] 25 VST 653 (Delhi), State of Andhra Pradesh v. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. [2002] 126 STC 114 (SC); [2002] 3 SCC 314; AIR 2002 SC 1305 and Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, Company Circle [1990] 77 STC 182 (AP). Per contra, the special counsel for CT(1) submits that when the show-cause notice was issued by the DC (CT), the (1)This is a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the goods. The decision of the Gauhati High Court in Indian Oil Corporation [2009] 22 VST 70 is a case of alleged transferee hiring the oil tankers for supply of petroleum to dealers, and therefore, the court therein held that there is no transfer of right to use the goods. These decisions are of no assistance to the petitioner in the factual background herein. We have also perused the decision of this court in Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. [1990] 77 STC 182 (AP), which is confirmed by the Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. [2002] 126 STC 114; [2002] 3 SCC 314; AIR 2002 SC 1305 as well as Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India [2006] 3 VST 95 (SC); [2006] 145 STC 91 (SC); [2006] 3 SCC 1. Before tur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ration". Explanation IV to section 2(n) of the Act defines "sale" as including, "a transfer of right to use any goods for any purpose for any period for monetary or non-monetary consideration shall be deemed to be a sale". We may quote section 5E, which is relevant for reference. "5E. Tax on the amount realized in respect of any right to use goods.-Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act,- (a) Every dealer who transfers the right to use any goods for any purpose, whatsoever, whether or not for a specified period, to any lessee or licensee for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration, in the course of his business shall, on the total amount realized or realizable by him by way of payment in cash or otherwise on suc....