TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 543
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of no effect and accordingly, set aside the same; (b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to further declare that the circular no. 16T of 2007 dated 20.2.2007 read with Circular No. 5T of 2009 dated 29.1.2009 alone are legal, valid and correct; (c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the Section 6A is inapplicable to interstate movement of final goods returned by a job workers to his customer, after job work. (d) In the alternative and without prejudice to prayer (c) above, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that Section 6A is ineffective, incomplete and inoperative is of no avail. (e) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records pertaining to the Petitioner's case and after going into the legality and validity thereof to quash and set aside impugned order dated 17.07.2015 passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No.447/2015 and impugned Assessment Order dated 14.08.2014; (f) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 7) It is claimed that the Petitioner received notices from the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax under the provisions of MVAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short "the CST Act"). Annexure 'J' is a copy of one such notice. 8) The Petitioner, during the course of assessment, appeared before the Deputy Commissioner and submitted that the present transaction is a job work only and hence not liable to sales tax. The Petitioner filed detailed written submissions and complains that despite this, an order of assessment has been passed on 14th August, 2014, which was received by the Petitioner on 7th November, 2014. 9) The case of the Sales Tax Department as reflected in the assessment order is then set out in the Petition from para 12 onwards and the Petitioner urges that it filed an Appeal to the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax. An order on the stay application therein imposing a condition of part payment of Rs. 7,96,00,000/- under the CST Act and Rs. 35,00,000/- under the MVAT Act was passed dated 24th March, 2015. The Petitioner preferred an Appeal against this order of the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax dated 24th March, 2015 before the Tribunal and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o provide that the burden of providing that the transfer of goods in such cases is "otherwise than by way of sale" shall lie on the dealer who claims exemption from tax on the ground that there was in fact no sale." 11(h) Relevant portion of section 6A(1) (as initially enacted) (omitting unnecessary words) reads as follows: "S. 6A. Burden of proof, etc., in case of transfer of goods claimed otherwise than by way of sale:- Where any dealer claims that he is not liable to pay tax under this Act, in respect of any goods, on the ground that the movement of such goods from one State to another was occasioned by reason of transfer of such goods by him to any other place of his business or to his agent or principal, as the case may be and not by reason of sale, the burden of proving that the movement of those goods was so occasioned shall be on that dealer and for this purpose he may furnish to the assessing authority, within the prescribed time ..............., a declaration, .........., containing the prescribed particulars .........., along with the evidence of despatch of such goods" 11(i) Vide Notification dated 9th February, 1973, Rule 12(5) was inserted in C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also specifically mentioned in the circular that there is no applicability of section 6A of the CST Act, 1956 in the case of job work transactions executed on principal to principal basis. 11(r) This earlier trade circular 16T of 2007 dated 20th February, 2007 was re-affirmed by the Respondents themselves vide circular 5T of 2009 dated 29th January, 2009. The respondents, duly noted decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Ambica Steels Limited, but distinguished it. Following is the relevant portion of said circular dated 29th January, 2009:- "The High Court has take a view that it would be necessary to furnish declarations in Form F in such instances (job work). It also appears that the question whether section 6A of the CST Act deals only with transactions between agent and principal to principal basis was not raised before the High Court. 3. In the trade circular dated 20th February, 2007, a view has been taken that when goods are sent to another state for job work, the transaction will normally be on a principal to principal basis. It is further stated in the circular that section 6A will have no applicability as regards the transactions where t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 6A(2). 11(x) Therefore, even after furnishing of declaration in 'F' form, whether an inter-state sale has been effected has to be independently looked into by the assessing authority. The requirements of an inter-state sale are only provided in section 3. Therefore, under section 6A(2) the assessing officer would have to establish the requirements of section 3 i.e. (i) a transaction of sale has taken place and (ii) the sale occasioned a movement of the goods sold inter-state. While section 6A(1) may aid in proving the latter, it will not dispense with primary requirement that a completed sale has indeed taken place. 11(y) If section 6A is interpreted in such a manner so as to conclude that the mere non production of the prescribed form will itself deem a return of goods as a sale, then clearly the expression .......... "no inter-state sale has been effected ....." employed in section 6A(2) would become redundant. Such an interpretation of section 6A is therefore not warranted. 11(z) Therefore, when contextually interpreted, with regard to the scheme of the CST Act, the object and purpose of section 6A and the words employed therein, it is clear that section 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this aspect and therefore ought to be noticed. There is elaboration of this argument. 12) Hence, the entire foundation of the submissions is that section 6A, when read with its object and purpose, applies only in case a dealer claims that he is not liable to pay tax under the CST Act and not when a dealer claims that he has effected no sale. 13) In the written arguments, all these submissions are elaborated and with the assistance of additional materials. 14) In support of the contentions, Mr. Sridharan places reliance on the following decisions:- (i) Sales Tax Officer, Pilibhit vs. Budh Prakash Jai Prakash, AIR 1954 SC 459. (ii) Balabhagas Hulaschand vs. State of Orissa, (1976) 2 SCC 44. (iii) Consolidated Coffee Ltd. and Anr. vs. Coffee Board, Bangalore, (1980) 3 SCC 358. (iv) Tata Iron and Steel Co. Limited, Bombay vs. S. R. Sarkar and Ors., AIR 1961 SC 65. (v) The State of Bihar and Anr. vs. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd., 1970(3) SCC 697. (vi) C. I. T., Bangalore vs. B. C. Srinivasa Setty, (1981) 2 SCC 460. (vii) Tata Sky Limited vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., (2013) 4 SCC 656. (v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Commercial Taxes, West Bengal and Anr. vs. West Bengal Commercial Taxes Tribunal and Anr., (1995) 99 STC 425 (WBTT). (xxxiii) Coleman vs. Harvey, In the Court of New Zealand, C. A. No. 151 of 1987, dated 22nd March, 1989. (xxxiv) Moriroku UT India (P) Limited vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors., (2008) 4 SCC 548. (xxxv) Merecer and Ors. vs. Craven Grain Storage Ltd., (1994) CLC 328, House of Lords. (xxxvi) Ariyaputhira Padayachi vs. Muthukumaraswamy Padayachi (1914) 37 ILR Mad. 423. (xxxvii) Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Kerala vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd., 2015 (39) STR 913 (SC). (xxxviii) The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. M/s. Kirloskar Copeland Ltd., Sales Tax Application No. 10 of 2012 (Bombay High Court), dated 8th May, 2014. 15) On the other hand, Mr. Sonpal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents would firstly submit that this Writ Petition itself cannot be entertained, as the Petitioner has ample opportunities to challenge the impugned order of assessment of tax. 16) Secondly, Mr. Sonpal would submit that it is futile to urge that this controversy is alive. The controversy st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould submit that the Petitions deserve to be dismissed. 19) For properly appreciating the rival contentions, at the cost of repetition, we must notice the essential facts. The Petitioner does not dispute that it is manufacturer and job worker both. It is engaged in the business of converting spent catalyst into support catalyst through processing. After describing the role of the catalyst, it is the case of the Petitioners that because the metals contained in the spent catalyst are precious and highly expensive, their customers use them by subjecting them to reprocessing, which is the work undertaken by the Petitioner. It has described the process of receipt of spent catalyst from various customers from outside and within the State of Maharashtra and how the reprocessing is done. The spent catalyst are reprocessed and recharged and such transactions have been termed as job work/labour undertaken by the Petitioner. The Petitioner claims to have charged their customers only for this job work. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has held that the remarkable aspect of the entire process is that there is no one to one co-relation between the spent catalyst received and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 21st December, 1956. It is an Act to formulate principles for determining when a sale or purchase of goods takes place in the course of inter-state trade or commerce or outside a State or in the course of imports into or export from India, to provide for the levy, collection and distribution of taxes on sale of goods in the course of inter-state trade or commerce and to declare certain goods to be of special importance in interstate trade or commerce and specify that restrictions and conditions to which State laws imposing taxes on the sale or purchase of such goods of special importance shall be subject. 24) Therefore, it is an enactment formulating principles for determining when a sale or purchase of goods takes place in the course of inter-state trade or commerce or outside a State or in the course of imports into or export from India. The enactment also seeks to levy, collect and distribute taxes on sales of goods in the course of such trade. Chapter I contains the preliminary provisions. Section 2 falling thereunder is titled as 'Definitions'. In that, term "dealer" is defined in section 2(b). The term "goods" is defined in section 2(d). Section 2(e) defines the term "pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....initions would reveal as to how unless the context otherwise requires, "sale" with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions, means any transfer of property in goods by one person to another for cash or deferred payment or for any other valuable consideration and includes the acts specified in sub-clauses of clause (g) of section 2, but does not include a mortgage, or hypothecation of or a charge or pledge on goods. Similarly, section 2(h) defines "sale price" to mean the amount payable to a dealer as consideration for the sale of any goods, less any sum allowed as cash discount according to the practice normally prevailing in the trade, but inclusive of any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before the delivery thereof other than the cost of freight or delivery or the cost of installation in cases where such cost is separately charged. 26) Chapter II contains sections to enable formulation of principles for determining when a sale or purchase of goods takes place in the course of inter-State trade or commerce or outside a state or in the course of import or export. 27) Section 3 is the first section falling in this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 3, the sale shall be taken to take place inside a State and that is clarified by sub-section (1) of section 4. However, such sale shall be deemed to have taken place outside all other States when the sale is determined in accordance with sub-section (2) of section 4. Subsection (2) comes in for the purposes of indicating that in the case of specific or ascertained goods at the time the contract of sale is made and in the case of unascertained or future goods at the time of their appropriation to the contract of sale by the seller or by the buyer, then, the goods are deemed to be sold inside a State. 31) Similarly, by section 5, when a sale or purchase of goods is said to take place in the course of import or export is specified. 32) By Chapter III, inter-State Sales Tax and the liability to tax on the same is the aspect dealt with and section 6 and 6A falling in the same Chapter read as under:- "6. Liability to tax on inter-State sales. - (1) Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, every dealer shall, with effect from such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint, not being earlier than thirty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....subject to tax generally at a rate which is lower than three per cent. or such reduced rate as may be notified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, under sub-section (1) of section 8 (whether called a tax or fee or by any other name); and (b) the dealer effecting such subsequent sale proves to the satisfaction of the authority referred to in the preceding proviso that such sale is of the nature referred to in this sub-section. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no tax under this Act shall be payable by any dealer in respect of sale of any goods made by such dealer, in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, to any official, personnel, consular or diplomatic agent of - (i) any foreign diplomatic mission or consulate in India; or (ii) the United Nations or any other similar international body, entitled to privileges under any convention or agreement to which India is a party or under any law for the time being in force, if such official, personnel, consular or diplomatic agent, as the case may be, has purchased such goods for himself or for the purposes of such mission, consulate, United Nations ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he findings of the assessing authority are contrary to law, and such reassessment or revision may be done in accordance with the provisions of general sales tax law of the State." 33) A perusal of sections 6 and 6A would indicate that by section 6, the liability to tax on inter-State sales is set out and by the amendment made to section 6 by introduction of sub-section (1A), it is apparent that a dealer shall be liable to pay tax under this Act on a sale of any goods effected by him in the course of inter-State trade or commerce notwithstanding that no tax would have been leviable (whether on the seller or the purchaser) under the sales tax law of the appropriate State if that sale had taken place inside that State. Sub-section (2) of section 6 deals with a sale of any goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce occasioning the movement of such goods from one State to another or having been effected by a transfer of documents of title to such goods during their movement from one State to another. The subsequent sale during such movement would be exempt from tax under the CST Act, provided the goods are of the description referred to in sub-section (3) of section 8. Thus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rticulars contained in the declaration furnished. That inquiry is about the truth of such contents and to arrive at a conclusion or decision that no inter-State sale has been effected. That enables the Assessing Officer at the time of or at any time before the assessment of the tax payable by the dealer under the CST Act to make an order within the meaning of sub-section (2). While making that order and despite making it, it is apparent that it is subject to sub-section (3). Hence, the conclusion rendered that the movement has been occasioned otherwise than as a result of sale is subject to sub-section (3) of section 6A. 35) Mr. Sridharan has relied upon on the 4 trade circulars in challenging the circular dated 11th January, 2010. Firstly, we will reproduce the circular under challenge, which reads as under:- "Office of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, 829, 8th Floor, Vikrikar Bhavan, Mazgaon, Mumbai - 400 010 TRADE CIRCULAR To .................... .................... No. VAT/MMB/1008/15/Adm-6/B (Trade Cir. No. - 2 of 2010) Mumbai, Dt. 11/01/2010 Sub: Tax Treatment of Goods sent to other States. Ref: 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f sale) including job work and goods return. Declarations in Form F will be issued to the dealers to comply with this view. 5. This Circular cannot be made use of for legal interpretation of the provisions of law, as it is clarificatory in nature. If any member of the trade has any doubt, he may refer the matter to this office for further clarification. 6. You are requested to bring the contents of this circular to the notice of all the members of your Association. Yours faithfully, (Sanjay Bhatia) Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Mumbai." 36) A perusal of this Circular indicates that the requirement of furnishing the declaration in form 'F' is mandatory and that is not dispensed with. 37) Mr. Sridharan would urge that this Circular presupposes that declaration in form 'F' would be issued necessarily by all States. It may be that the Maharashtra Government and the Commissioner of Sales Tax in Maharashtra would issue declarations in form 'F', but in the event another State does not follow this practice or does not issue declaration in that form, then, it would be necessarily held in the State of Maharashtra tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es that where the dealer claims that he is not liable to pay tax in respect of the goods sent as aforesaid to another State to his own place of business or to his agent or to his principal, on the ground that the movement of goods was not by reason of sale, then the burden of proving that the movement of goods was so occasioned, is on the dealer. It may be noted that this section applies only in those cases where the movement of good is to the place of business of the dealer in another State or to his agent or principal in another State. The section has no applicability where the goods are sent to another State for purposes other than those enumerated in that section. The word 'Agent' as used in this section means the Agent as defined in Section 182 of the Indian Contract Act. That Section reads as follows: 182. "Agent" and "principal" defined: "An Agent is a person employed to do any act for another or to represent another in dealing with third persons. The person for whom such work is done or who is so represented is called the "principal". (2) Normally, persons acting as brokers, factors, auctioneers, commission agents, del credere agents etc. are the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rule 53 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 deals with reduction in set-off. Sub-rule (3) of this rule deals with the case where the claimant dealer dispatches any taxable goods outside the State, not by reason of sale, to his own place of business or of his agent or where the claimant dealer is an agent, to the place of business of his principal. If the goods are so dispatched, then in the contingencies described in the said sub-rule, the set-off available to the dealer is to be reduced as provided therein. 7. It may be noted that phraseology used in sub-rule (3) of Rule 53 is the same as the phraseology used in Section 6A of the CST Act. In other words, the rule regarding reduction of set-off operates in only those contingencies which are covered by Section 6A of the CST Act. The rule will not apply in instances where Section 6A of the CST Act has no applicability. It is, therefore, clear that the reduction in set-off contemplated under the said sub-rule does not apply where the goods are sent to another State for job work or for manufacturing etc. on a 'principal to principal' basis. Subject to the other provisions of that sub-rule, the reduction in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was whether the petitioner is required to submit the declaration in Form F in respect of the transactions of job work performed by it or got done by others. The High Court has taken a view that it would be necessary to furnish declarations in Form F in such instances. It also appears that the question whether Section 6A of the CST Act deals only with transactions between agent and principal or whether it deals with transactions which are on a principal to principal basis was not raised before the High Court. 3. In the Trade Circular dated 20th February 2007, a view has been taken that when goods are sent to another State for job work or for manufacturing etc., the transaction will normally be on a principal to principal basis with an independent operator and not on a principal to agent basis. It is, further stated in the circular that Section 6A will have no applicability as regards the transactions where the goods are sent on a principal to principal basis. It is possible that in view of the judgment of the Uttar Pradesh High Court, dealers situated in other States may require a declaration in Form F from Maharashtra dealers if any goods are sent from these States to Ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Fourthly and lastly, as in this case, read as a whole, we do not find that the prior circulars lay down any absolute principles and as pressed into service by Mr. Sridharan. These circulars and all clauses and paras thereof would have to be read together and harmoniously. They would indicate that the trade has to be guided. True it is that in the circular of 29th January, 2009 in para 2, the judgment of the Allahabad High Court has been referred. Despite that judgment, the Department is reiterating the position as emerging from Trade Circular dated 20th February, 2007. The further circular only states that in the light of the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, dealers situated in other State may require a declaration form from Maharashtra dealers, if the goods are sent from these States to Maharashtra for job work etc. Similarly, if a Maharashtra based dealer sends any goods to another State for job work, then, the job worker in that State may require the Maharashtra dealer to issue a declaration in form 'F' while returning the goods to Maharashtra. The Revenue, namely, the Departments in Maharashtra, therefore, decided to issue a declaration in form 'F' as per n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tain any form 'F' in respect of the transaction of job work as it did not involve any sale. The Assessing Officer called upon the dealer to produce the declaration in form 'F', but it submitted a reply that no form 'F' is required for such transaction. The explanation was rejected. However, the time to furnish form 'F' was extended, but even that was not adhered to. Later on, for such failure, tax was demanded from the dealer by relying upon this circular referred above. It is in this context that the challenge was raised and the Allahabad High Court considered it. After referring to the rival contentions, the Division Bench presided over by Hon'le Mr. Justice R. K. Agrawal (as his Lordship then was) held as under:- "We have given our anxious consideration to the various pleas raised by the learned Counsel for the parties. We find that, under Sub-clause (ii) of Clause (g) of section 2 of the Central Act, a transfer of property in goods whether as goods or in some other form, involved in execution of a work contract, is included in the definition of the word "sale". Section 6 is the charging section and creates liability to tax on inter-S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to furnish the evidence of such dispatch of goods by reason of Act 20 of 2002. In the event, if it fails to furnish such declaration, by reason of legal fiction, such movement of goods would be deemed for all purposes of the said Act to have been occasioned as a result of sale. Such declaration indisputably is to be filed in form F. The said form is to be filled in triplicate. The prescribed authority of the transferee State supplies the said form. The original of the said form is to be filed within the transferor State and the duplicate thereof is to be filed before the authorities of the transferee State whereas the counter-foil is to be preserved by the person where the agent or principal of the place of business of the company is situated." In paragraph 37 of the Report, it has further held as under: "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 was occasioned otherwise than as a result of sale" The apex court has, therefore, clearly laid down that, under section 6A of the Central Act, the burden would be on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Court of India and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India judgment is reported in (2009) 24 VST 356. In that short order, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held as under:- "Shri Sorabjee, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, on instructions, states that the appellant-assessee will submit itself to the reassessment proceedings initiated vide show-cause notice (see annexure P2). He further states that the assessee will file form F with the authority concerned within ten weeks from today. On expiry of the period of ten weeks the assessing officer will take up reassessment proceedings which will be completed within a period of three months, thereafter. At this stage, it may be mentioned that on the scope and applicability of section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, there exists difference of opinion between the various sales tax collectors in the country and therefore since the appellant is now ready to file form F, we are directing the assessing officer not to impose penalty/interest, in the reassessment proceedings as a one-time waiver. Needless to add that waiver of penalty and interest shall be admissible only on form F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee is not in a position to obtain form 'F' for no fault of his. 46) We do not think that there is any ambiguity in the legal position. Further, we do not see anything ambiguous or vague in the circular issued by the State of Maharashtra after this judgment in the case of Ambica Steels Limited (supra) by both, the Allahabad High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. We are of the firm view that furnishing and scrutiny/verification of the declaration in that form is a requirement in law and if that is fulfilled, the burden on the dealer is taken to be discharged. If that declaration is not furnished, then, the consequences follow. The goods might have been despatched for job work and not as and by way of sale, but that is the plea or case of the dealer. If that is the case and the burden is on him to prove it, then, he has to obtain the declaration. If the declaration is not being issued by some States in the form prescribed, namely form 'F' and the dealer made all the efforts to obtain it but failure to produce it is not his fault, then, he may, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India clarifies, request the Assessing Officer to take that circumstan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957. Upon perusal of this Rule, it would be clear that the declaration referred to in sub-section (1) of section 6A of the CST Act shall be in form 'F' and the proviso thereto clarifies that a single declaration of the nature mentioned in the proviso may suffice. 49) Therefore, we do not see as to how the section poses any difficulty or is in any way invalid or illegal. Advisedly, neither the provision is challenged nor the competence of the Parliament to bring in the section by way of amendment. Once the ambit and scope of the legal provision has been duly explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2004) 134 STC 473 (SC) and that judgment has been applied and followed by the Allahabad High Court in its verdict in the case of Ambika Steels Ltd. (supra), then, all the more we are unable to accept the arguments of Mr. Sridharan. 50) The other principles relied upon by Mr. Sridharan and with regard to the interpretation of a charging provision and a machinery section in the taxing statute need not be considered in further details. Those principles are app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that only complete sales are exigible to Sales Tax and no tax is leviable where machinery provision is absent and need to be considered in further details. These principles are well settled. There is no need, therefore, to refer to every judgment cited and particularly the one in the case of Balabhagas Hulaschand vs. State of Orissa reported in (1976) 2 SCC 44 or the judgment in the case of C. I. T., Bangalore vs. B. C. Srinivasa Setty reported in (1981) 2 SCC 460. The Petitioners can very well rely upon these principles in the course of their arguments in the Appeal. 53) The emphasis on the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Kerarla vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. reported in 2015(39) STR 913 (SC), particularly the reliance on paras 20 and 22 thereof need not be considered for the simple reason that it dealt with the scheme of taxing statutes. If there is no machinery provision, then, in their absence, the law is held to be vague and it would be arbitrariness to assess tax. However, these principles and in absence of a machinery provision would apply from statute to statute. For that, facts have to be noted and peculiarities of the transaction invol....