TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 124
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9022/05 dated 26.09.2005 of the First Respondent; (ii)the Assessment Order in CST No. 411164/2003-04 dated 28.02.2006; and (iii) the Assessment Order in TNGST No. 3140455/2003-04 dated 28.02.2006, respectively. 2.The Petitioner is a registered dealer in Cotton lint, vegetable seed, paddy seed and cotton seed for sowing purpose only. The Petitioner states that the seeds are treated with fungicides, insecticides and pasted with bio-polymers and that, as a result of the commercial treatment, the seeds become poisonous and cannot be used for edible purposes. In effect, according to the Petitioner, the seeds become inedible and are capable of being used only for sowing purposes by farmers. According to the Petitioner, the seeds were classifie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ption." In response to the said representation, by reply dated 30.08.2005, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chepauk, Chennai informed the Tamil Nadu Seed Association that the request for amendment cannot be accepted. Thereafter, it appears that Clarification No.147 dated 26.09.2005 was issued stating that hybrid cotton seeds are taxable at the rate of 4% under entry 6(iii) of the II Schedule to the TNGST Act and the said Clarification is impugned in W.P. No. 10768 of 2006. This position was reiterated by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes by letter dated 13.10.2005 wherein it was further stated that the usage theory cannot be invoked in entry 7 Part-B of the III Schedule. Thereafter, the assessment orders dated 28.02.2006 were iss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the first respondent is set aside and the matter is remitted to the first respondent for passing appropriate orders, independently applying the Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act,1959, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 4.The learned counsel also referred to the Order of this Court in M/s.VEESONS ENERGY SYSTEMS (P) LTD Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENNAI in W.P.(MD)No.5866 of 2010, wherein this Court held that the first respondent therein did not have power to suo moto issue a clarification under Section 48 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ope of the principal entry, namely, oil seeds. She also referred to the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in V.SOMASUNDARAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU in (2010)33 VST 474, wherein it was held that groundnut cannot be regarded as a vegetable seed but can only be regarded as an oil seed, which is taxable under the II Schedule. 6.Upon carefully considering the affidavit, documents on record and the oral submissions, it is clear that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the First Respondent herein, has stated, in the letter dated 30.08.2005 that the request for amendment of entry 7 cannot be complied with and, in the Clarification dated 26.09.2005, that hybrid cotton seeds are taxable at the rate of 4% under entry 6(iii) of the II Schedule....