TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 592
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed counsel for the appellant-assessee, and Sri Aditya Vikram Bhat, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 2. This appeal by the assessee is filed under Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, read with Section 66(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, assailing the suo motu revisional order dated 21.03.2017. 3. The assessee-appellant is engaged in the business of selling human hair to exporters. During the year 2009-10, the appellant sold human hair valued at Rs. 98,68,098/- to the exporter M/s. Srinivasa Hair Industries, Eluru (AP), and raised the corresponding sales invoices. A proposition notice was issued, proposing to treat the sales made to M/s. Srinivasa Hair Industries as inter-stat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e notice on the ground that the order dated 24.12.2016 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The suo motu revisional authority, after considering the contentions raised by the assessee, held that the 'H' Form in question could be considered only for the transactions covered in a single quarter and remitted the matter to the prescribed authority for fresh disposal. Hence, this appeal by the assessee. 4. Sri G.V. Ashok, learned counsel for the appellant- assessee, submits that the purchase of human hair for the purpose of sale to an exporter is not in dispute. Learned counsel further submits that the Assessing Officer has not disputed the turnover of deemed exports as declared in the returns or in the books of accou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation of all sales transactions taking place in a quarter of a financial year between the same two dealers. He further submits that the Circular dated 11.04.2014 relates only to the 'C' Form and does not cover the 'H' Form. Therefore, the benefit of the said circular cannot be extended under Rule 12(10)(b) of the CST (R & T) Rules. Learned Additional Government Advocate contends that all notifications issued in connection with the 'C' Form cannot be applied mutatis mutandis to the 'H' Form by reading sub-clause (b) of sub-rule (10) of Rule 12 when such application was not intended. He further submits that when an exemption is subject to compliance with prescribed conditions, such compliance must be strictly observed, and the benefit of a ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....may cover all transactions of sale which take place in a quarter of a Financial Year between the same two dealers: Provided also that where, in the case of any transaction of sale, the delivery of goods is spread over to different quarters in a financial year or of different financial years, it shall be necessary to furnish a separate declaration or certificate in respect of goods delivered in each quarter of a financial year.]" "12(10)(b) The provisions of the rules framed by the respective State Governments under sub-section (3), (4) and (5) of section 13 relating to authority from whom and the conditions subject to which any form of certificate in Form "H" may be obtained, the manner in which such form shall be kept in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 'H' Form may cover all transactions of sale taking place in a quarter of a financial year between the same two dealers. 10. The next issue relates to the Circular dated 11.04.2014. Undoubtedly, the circular deals with 'C' or 'F' Forms. It provides that, by way of relaxation of the second proviso to Rule 12(1) of the CST (R & T) Rules, a declaration in the 'C' Form covering transactions taking place beyond a single quarter would be allowed, and such declarations would be treated as valid. The circular further provides that, in case of any doubt regarding the genuineness of such declarations, the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Tax (I & C) is instructed to cross verify the same. 11. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in Mahabaleshwara....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Authority is one of the possible views. Merely because another view is possible, the order under revision cannot be held to be erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The exercise of revisional jurisdiction is not warranted merely on the ground that an alternative view is available. In the case on hand, for the reasons discussed hereinabove, this Court is of the opinion that the view taken by the Appellate Authority is justifiable. 14. The judgments cited by the learned Additional Government Advocate are not applicable to the facts of the present case. It is well settled that, where ambiguity exists in the provisions, the same is to be interpreted in a manner that advances the object intended to be achieved. There is no ....