TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 368
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rused the materials placed on record, including the written instructions given by the Assessing Officer to the learned Special Government Pleader, vide letter dated 19.12.2014. 2. The short issue, which falls for consideration is, whether the petitioners herein, which are two units of National Textile Corporation Ltd., could be treated as two different entities and the transfer of yarn from one of the entity to the other, for the purpose of manufacture of cloth, which is an exempted commodity, would amount to sale. 3. The respondent issued show cause notices to the petitioners. The petitioner in W.P.No.28365 of 2013 is a unit called Pankaja Mills and the petitioner in W.P.No.12211 of 2014 is Sri Rangavilas Ginning, Spinning & Weaving ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent proposed to tax the inter unit transfer, denied exemption to the said turnover and treated them as sale and levied tax at the rate of 4% / 5% respectively. On receipt of these notices, the petitioner submitted separate replies dated 23.08.2013 and 29.01.2014 respectively. It was stated that in order to attract sales tax, there should be a sale and sale has been defined under Section 2[33] of the Act as transfer of property of goods by one person to another in the course of business for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration. It was stated that transfer of cotton and cotton yarn only to their own unit, which is an unit of National Textile Corporation Ltd. 6. The petitioners stated that they are the units of National Te....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of The K.C.P. Limited Vs State of Andhra Pradesh 88 STC 374. By referring to the said decision and after setting out the factual issues in the said case, it was pointed out that the definition of sale which was considered by the Andhra High Court is similar to the definition of sale under the Act. Therefore, the decision is applicable to the petitioners case. 9. Further, it was submitted that the show cause notices having been issued, based on the report of the Enforcement Department, it is a case of clear change of opinion and the assessment cannot be re-opened. The respondent rejected the explanation given, stating that since both the units have separate TIN numbers, they have to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....action as sale, in terms of the definition of sale, as defined under Section 2[33] of the Act were not fulfilled, the transaction could not have been treated as sale. There is no other material in the hands of the Assessing Officer, to come to such a conclusion that the transaction is sale, merely because the units have separate registration numbers. 12. In K.C.P. Limited [supra], somewhat an identical issue arose for consideration and the Hon'ble Division Bench pointed out that the registration certificate obtained by each branch or unit may, at best show, that they are separate assessable entities and it has no bearing on the question, whether they are distinct and different legal entities capable of transferring property in goods ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate places may be regarded as separate dealers for the purpose of administrative convenience or for assessment purpose. But, that does not mean that each unit would thereby become an independent legal personality different from the company itself. If the test of registration as a dealer under the Sales Tax Acts is taken as the true index of the separate juristic personality of the registered unit or concern, it would lead to anomalous and unintended results. . The separate registration of various units of a single company under the respective Sales Tax Acts may be necessitated either on account of geographical location of the units or by reason of statutory obligation imposed under the relevant provisions to obtain a separate registration c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ical issue arose for consideration, whether the petitioner was a registered dealer engaged in manufacture of furniture, being a unit owned by the Kerala State Small Industries Development and Employment Corporation Ltd. [SIDECO]. The Assessing Officer did not impose tax on the value of the furniture of supply to the other units of SIDECO. However, the Deputy Commissioner, exercising power under Section 35 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, reopened the assessment, on the ground that since the petitioner has only paid Rs. 10/- towards renewal fee of its registration certificate and not paid any branch certificate renewal fee for the other units, the supplies made to the other units could not be considered as branch transfer, but sale....