TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1272
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utory form F. Based on the details in form F, sale pattials, ledger extract of the principal herein as well as the agent, the assessing authority accepted the case of the assessee that the claim fell under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, entitled to exemption. Thus the assessee's claim on a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 12,01,300 was accepted and an assessment was completed by the assessing authority on November 30, 1994 granting exemption under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act. Subsequent thereto, the assessment was sought to be reopened on the ground that the consignee had taken delivery of the goods at Pollachi itself and that the movement of goods were noted in form XX delivery note as movement to "our branch". The assessing officer viewed that when the assessee had no branch in Kerala, the claim of the assessee has consignment sales could not be accepted. He further viewed that as the agent had taken possession in this State itself and only thereafter moved the same in its vehicle, the same amounted to a sale within the State assessable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. Thus the assessing authority proposed to withdraw the exemption granted un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....adu check-post, Kerala check-post as well as the Revenue check-post, indicated that the goods had, in fact, crossed over to Kerala as that of the petitioner and that the Ashoka Confectionary was only an agent for effecting sales in Kerala. Considering the fact that form XX contained the name of the consignor and the consignee, the reference as to the "consignment stock transfer to our branch", has to be read in as with reference to the consignee and not having any relevance to the petitioner-consignor. He further pointed out that when in the original assessment, the assessing authority had satisfied himself as to the claim of the assessee by verifying the details in form F, apart from the agreement on payment of commission as well as the accounts of the assessee as well as that of the agent, in the absence of any other material to discredit the details in form F, the claim could not be rejected under section 16 proceedings. He further pointed out that there are no materials to doubt the truthfulness of the contents in form F. Thus, applying the decision of the Supreme Court reported in Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [2004] 134 STC 473 (SC), the re-assessment proceedings ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rm XX merely referred to the movement as "our branch", nothing had been spoken to in the order of reassessment to touch on the details contained in form F. The first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal merely accepted the case of the Revenue on the ground on which the assessment was reopened. Evidently, none of these authorities considered the relevancy of the details in form F for the purpose of reopening the assessment. As regards the jurisdiction of the assessing authority to reopen the assessment, in matters falling for consideration under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Supreme Court had an occasion to consider the scope of section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act with reference to section 16 proceedings in the decision reported in Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [2004] 134 STC 473 (SC), wherein the apex court pointed out as follows (para 37, at page 502 in 134 STC):- "36. By reason of sub-section (2) of section 6A, a legal fiction has been created for the purpose of the said Act to the effect that transaction has occasioned otherwise than as a result of sale. On ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the fact that the consignee had an office within the State, i.e., at Pollachi. It is further pointed out by the assessing authority that the consignee took delivery of the goods and the goods started moving in the vehicle belonging to the consignee. The third ground on which reopening was done was that there was a specific remark in form XX that "consignment stock transfer to our branch". In the absence of any specific branch of the petitioner available in Kerala, the contention that the movement was not towards the agent's branch, hence, could not be accepted. The assessing authority further pointed out that the agreement did not mention anything about the transportation or as regards the payment of commission. Thus the entire reassessment rested only on the abovesaid facts and none of these materials were tested with reference to the details given in form F. Thus when the original assessment rested on the findings of enquiry with reference to the details in form F and the findings on form F thus remaining undisturbed even in the reassessment proceedings, applying the law declared by the apex court, we do not find that the reassessment order passed revoking the exemption grant....