TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 935
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....763-1764/2014 (M/s. V.N. Corporation vs. State of Karnataka) whereby, the learned Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals and held that declaration of 'F' Form under Rule 12(5) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 (for short 'CST (R & T) Rules, 1957), covering a period over one month can be accepted by the Assessing Authority as valid in support of the branch transfers or stock transfers made by the assessee during the relevant period and following the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Cipla Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner, CT (Cal) reported in (2013) 61 VST 445(Cal), the learned Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee. The relevant observations of the learned Tribunal in the impugned order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal, but they are not in compliance to the provisions of Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957. Hence, the FAA has rejected such of those F forms which covers the stock transfers of more than one calendar month and taxed the same as inter-state sales without C forms. (iii) The contention of the learned Chartered Accountant in this regard is that filing of F form is mandatory for stock transfers but the interpretation made by FAA with regard to provisions of Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957 is not in consonance with the intendment of the Parliament in prescribing the filing of F form for stock transfers covering more than one calendar month as the Parliament has used the word "may" in Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rule....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not be held as invalid declaration form as the words mentioned in Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957 is "may". The Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957 uses the permissive term "may" and not "shall". The Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with the use of word "may" in an enactment has ruled in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Smt. P.K. Noorjahan in their decision reported in (1999) 237 ITR page 570 (SC) (at page 573) as under: ".............The submission is that the word "may" in section 69 should be read as "shall". We are unable to agree. As pointed out by the Tribunal, in the corresponding clause in the Bill which was introduced in Parliament, the word "shall" had been used but during the course of consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....regarding the fact that it is only directory as the said provision uses the word "may" and not "shall". Accordingly, this issue is answered in negative and against the revenue." 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-revenue has urged before us that the first proviso to Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957, clearly provided for furnishing of such 'F' forms for a period of one calendar month and admittedly, the First Appellate Authority found in its impugned order dated 12.05.2014 that some of the 'F' forms cover period far exceeding one month namely, 5 to 8 months of the transaction of such branch transfers and in view of the clear violation of Rule 12(5) the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957, the learned Tribunal was not justified in setting ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 or within such further time as that authority may, for sufficient cause, permit, a declaration, duly filled and signed by the principal officer of the other place of business, or his agent or principal, as the case may be, containing the prescribed particulars in the prescribed form obtained from the prescr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ge 570 (SC) have already been quoted by the Tribunal in the impugned order. 7. We find that the controversy involved in the present case is duly supported by the aforesaid decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Calcutta High Court and we find no reason to take a different view of the matter in the present case. 8. Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957, is directory in nature and the second proviso of Rule 12(5) of the CST (R & T) Rules, 1957, quoted above clearly envisages that the particulars to be furnished in 'F' Forms can even be supplied to the Assessing Authority in a separate annexure attached such declaration form. Therefore, giving one declaration form for one calendar month as provided in the first proviso is a m....