2015 (3) TMI 475
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1989-90. The questions of law raised in the above tax case (revisions) are almost identical. They relate to levy of sales tax on vend fee, levy of purchase tax under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act on the purchase of empty bottles from unregistered dealers and penalty levied under section 12(3) and 12(5)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. While T.C. (R) No. 1669 of 2008 relates to levy of penalty under section 12(3)/ 12(5) (iii) on the turnover relating to excise duty and vend fee apart from tax on vend fee and section 7A purchase tax for purchase of empty bottles, T.C. (R) No. l857 of 2008 relates to levy of purchase tax under section 7A and penalty under section 12(5) (iii) based on turnover relating to exci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ottles from unregistered dealers has to be assessed under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. This leaves us with only one question as regards the levy of penalty, which is a common question in all the four tax cases. The learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee pointed out that on the question of levy of penalty, as of today, the only turnover that survives for consideration by this court is on the aspect of excise duty and section 7A levy, where this court had already confirmed the assessment on the inclusion of excise duty as part of the turnover and the liability under section 7A. As far as the levy of penalty on the question of excise duty levied on the petitioner is concerned, learned senior counsel pointed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deration till the amendments were brought into the Tamil Nadu Indian Made Foreign Spirits (Manufacture) Rules, 1981 as well as to the Tamil Nadu Indian Made Foreign Spirits (Supply of Wholesale) Rules, 1981 made under the provisions of the Prohibition Act. He further pointed out that by reason of the correspondences between the Chairman of the Tasmac and the further deliberations between the Prohibition and Excise Department and the assessee entertaining the impression that the Tasmac being the authority to meet the liability on payment of excise duty, and hence there was a bona fide dispute as to the inclusion of excise duty in the turnover of the assessee. In the background of this, when a dispute was raised before this court, the same wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TC 500 (Mad) (Appollo Saline Pharmaceuticals (P) Limited v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer), he submitted that there is no case for levy of penalty and hence the same has to be cancelled. It is a matter of relevance to note that the cancellation of the clarification circular dated December 27, 2000 under order dated January 28, 2002 itself came consequent on the decision of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal dated April 20, 1994. The said decision was confirmed by this court in the decision reported in [2002] 125 STC 500 (Mad) (Appollo Saline Pharmaceuticals (P) Limited v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer). Thus, on the position thus prevailed till the decision of this court, the bona fides of the assessee in not offering the turnover un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....end fee. In the light of the decision we have taken in T.C. (R) No. 1669 of 2008 following the decision dated September 19, 2013 in T.C. (R) No. 637 of 2006 (Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [2014] 67 VST 102 (Mad)), the question of levy of penalty on vend fee does not arise; consequently, penalty stands deleted. As regards the liability under section 7A, which is a subject-matter in all the four tax cases, as fairly submitted by the learned senior counsel appear ing for the assessee, the same has to be answered against the assessee by following the decision of this court reported in [2005] 139 STC 477 (Mad) (Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Limited v. Commercial Tax Officer, Porur Assessment Circle, Chennai). I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the argument of the learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee that till the decision was rendered by this court in [1990] 78 STC 461 (Mad) dated 25th April, 1989 (Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer), the assessee acted on the basis of the various amendments that had come to the provisions of the Prohibition Act as well as the liquor vending rules and manufacturing rules and the arrangements made between the assessee, Tasmac and the Government as regards the liability of the assessee and with the bona fide dispute thus raised by the assessee as to the includability of the excise duty, we do not find any justifiable ground to accept the plea of the Revenue as to the absence of bona fides of its claim. I....