AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (8) TMI 1259
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The issue involved in this writ petition lies in a narrow campus. The petitioner is an Unincorporated Joint Venture undertaking and its Joint Venture partner is M/s. L&T Geostructure LLP formed for the purpose of executing the project at Polavaram for construction of Polavaram dam for the State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act and they have obtained import and export code in the State of Tamil Nadu for import of necessary goods for Andhra Pradesh Government's project from the Chennai Sea and Airport. 4. The modus adopted by the petitioner is that their administrative office at Chennai, places purchase order on the foreign importer and its joint v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and was given only for the purpose of issuing purchase order and movement of imported materials from the port after following the IEC formalities. Therefore, it is submitted that the question of obtaining registration under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act by the petitioner does not arise, as the goods imported are directly moving to the project site at Andhra Pradesh and there is no sale involved in the transaction. 8. The respondent passed an order dated 25.03.2017 demanding payment of tax at 14.5% and imposing two times compounding fees. This was challenged by filing a Writ petition in W.P.No.7626/2017, which was allowed by an order dated 27.03.2017, with a direction to the respondent therein to pass a fresh order after giving an oppo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12. Learned Additional Government Pleader, by referring to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, has submitted that the petitioner is an unregistered dealer in the State of Tamil Nadu and therefore, the goods were detained and there is evasion of tax to the State of Tamil Nadu. Therefore the respondent was fully justified in passing the impugned order. It is further submitted that the details of the certificate, Import Export Code registration was gathered from the IEC gate website. Therefore, it is seen that the registration was obtained by the petitioner's Head Office located at Chennai, Tamil Nadu State. 13. The stand taken by the petitioner is that the liaison office alone is at Chennai cannot be accepted as all accommodat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ods from Tamil Nadu to Andhra Pradesh. The respondent has justified in levying the tax and penalty on the transaction by referring three aspects namely obtaining Import and Export Code registration by using the Chennai address. The Customs invoice has been raised in the address at Chennai. One of the joint venture partners namely M/s. L&T Geostructure LLP is situated at Chennai and the Bankers are also in Chennai. Therefore, it is the case of the respondent that it is the Chennai establishment, which imports the goods and from the State of Tamil Nadu, it is transported to the State of Andhra Pradesh project site and therefore, it is a sale within the State. 17. On a perusal of the joint venture agreement dated 16.01.2015, it is seen that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cord to show that the joint venture with address at Chennai had sold the goods to the Joint venture with address at Andhra Pradesh. It may not be true that the Import and Export Code has been obtained in the name of the petitioner joint venture, giving the Chennai address, that by itself will not create a doubt in the transaction nor permit the transaction as a sale within the State of Tamil Nadu. For such interpretation given, it would be contrary to the section 5 (2) of the Central Sales Tax Act which provides that a sale or purchase of goods shall be deemed to be take place in the course of import of the goods into the territory of India only if the sale or purchase either occasions such import or is effected by a transfer of documents o....