2015 (7) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der of the Appellate Tribunal is correct in interpreting the expression does not sell the goods so manufactured occurring in sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 as including not only intra state but also export sale? ii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in invoking the principle of situs as envisaged in Explanation 3 (a) to Section 2 (n) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for the purpose of interpretation of the expression does not sell the goods so manufactured as contained in sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Act so as to bring it within the ambit of the said explanation? iii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in construing that the levy of tax attracted under Sect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cture of goods exported at Rs. 19,55,340/-applying formula and assessed the same at 1% under Section 3(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who dismissed appeal, thereby upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. As against the same, the assessee once again pursued the matter before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, placing reliance on the decision of this Court dated 08.10.2010 in T.C.(A)No.39 of 2009, dismissed the appeal on the ground that export is also a sale as contemplated in the first part of Section 3(4) of the TNGST Act, 1959 and hence could not be assessed to tax under Se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncessional rate of 3% tax by using Form-XVII, under Section 3(3) of the Act would negate the very Constitutional restriction imposed under Article 286 as a 'deemed export' as set out under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, the same cannot be countenanced. In this context, it will be worthwhile to refer to a Division Bench decision of this Court reported in 2005 (3) LW 101 (N.PRIYADARSHINI VS. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI-9 AND ANOTHER). Para 27 of the said decision is relevant for our purpose, which reads as under:- ".....27. In this connection, it may be mentioned that according to theory of the eminent jurist Kelsen (the pure theory of law) in every country there is a hier....