SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 687

1999(4) Supreme 526
Supreme Court of India
(From Andhra Pradesh High Court)
S.P. Bharucha, B.N. Kirpal, S. Rajendra Babu, S.S. Mohammed Quadri & M.B. Shah, JJ.
M/s. VVS Sugars etc. etc. -Appellants
versus
Govt. of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 903 of 1984
With
(C.A. Nos. 889-91/84, 892, 893/84, 894-902/84, 2855/87, 4214-15/93 and 84-87/93)
Decided on 28-4-1999
Counsel for the Parties
For the Appearing Parties : Mrs. K. Amreshwari, Anil B. Divan, Sr. Advocates, Ms. Sudha Gupta, G. Venkatesh, B.K. Rao, T.V. Ratnam, Syed Naqvi, Mrs. Urmila Sirur, G. Narasimhulu, K. Ram Kumar, Ms. Asha G. Nair, Shantinarayan, Sridhar, V. Krishna­murthy, G. Prabhakar, Vinoo Bhagat, Advocates.

Important point
There being no substantive provision in the Andhra Pradesh Sugar­cane (Regu­lation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1961 for levy of interest on arrears of tax that applied to purchase of sugarcane made subsequent to the date of commencement of Amending Act, 1976, no interest there on could be so levied based on the appli­cation of Rule 45 or otherwise.

Headnote:Andhra Pradesh Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1961 as amended by Act 25 of 1976-Section 21(3D), (4) and (5)-Andhra Pradesh Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply & Purchase) Rules, 1961-Rule 45(4) -Interest on arrears of tax-There is no substantive provision in the Act for levy of interest on arrears of tax that applied to purchase of sugarcane made subsequent to date of commencement of Amending Act i.e. 29.12.1975-No interest could be levied based on application of Rule 45 or otherwise.

       Held : The said Act is a taxing statute and a taxing statute must be interpreted as it reads, with no additions and no subtractions, on the ground of legislative intendment or otherwise. On the plain wording of clause (a) of sub-section (3D) of Section 21 of the Act as amended, we find it difficult to agree with the High Court. The provisions thereof say that sub-section (5) shall not apply in relation to tax levied under sub-section (1) of Section 21 on purchase of sugarcane. The provisions came into force on the date of the commencement of the Amending Act. the provisions are open ended and are intended to apply upon the commencement of the Amending Act with no limitation in time. (Paras 4 and 5)

       Interest can be levied and charged on delayed payment of tax only if the statute that levies and charg­es the tax makes a substantive provision in this behalf. There being no substantive provision in the Act for the levy of inter­est on arrears of tax that applied to purchases of sugarcane made subsequent to the date of commencement of the Amending Act, no interest thereon could be so levied, based on the application of the said Rule 45 or otherwise. (Para 6)

       

Judgment

Bharucha, J.-We are concerned with the interpretation of Section 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1961, as amended by Act 25 of 1976. Principally, the provisions to be dealt with are sub-sections (3D), (4) and (5) of Section 21 which read thus :

“(3-D) In relation to the tax levied under sub-section (1) and in respect of purchase of sugarcane on or after the date of commen­cement as aforesaid :-

(a) Sub-sections (4) and (5) shall not apply, and the tax shall be deemed due date of purchase of sugarcane or the date of commencement as aforesaid, whichever is later;

(b) Sub-section (3-C) shall apply with the modification that where the assessing authority is satisfied that the Occupier of a factory or Owner of Khandasari unit has removed or cause to be removed any sugar in contravention of the provision of this section or has failed to account fully for the sugar produced in the factory or Khandasari unit or deposited by him under the provision to sub-section (3), the person liable to pay the tax shall in addition to the amount payable under sub-section (3) in respect of the quantity of sugar so removed or caused to be removed or unaccounted for, be also liable to pay by way of penalty a further sum not exceeding one hundred percent of the sum so payable;

(c) The provisions of the sub-section shall be without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (3-C).

(4) The tax payable under sub-section (1) shall be levied and collected from the Occupier of the factory ‘or Owner of the Khandasari unit’ in such manner and by such authority as may be prescribed.

(5) Arrears of tax shall carry interest at such rate as may be prescribed,”

2. The question is whether, subsequent to the said provisions as amended, any interest could be levied on arrears of tax under sub-rule (4) of Rule 45 of the Andhra Pradesh Sugarcane (Regula­tion of Supply & Purchase) Rules, 1961. Rule 45, so far as it is relevant, reads thus :

“45(3) Any amount of tax still remaining unpaid, as finally arrived at, at the end of the crushing season on the revised assessment of tax worked out and communicated by the assessing authority under sub-section (3-B) of Section 21, shall be treated as arrear under sub-section (5) of Section 21 of the Act.

(4) Such arrears shall carry interest at the rate of 16 percent per annum from the date following the date of closure of crushing till the amount is finally paid.”

3. The argument on behalf of the appellants is that by reason of clause (a) of sub-section (3D) of Section 21, as amended sub-sections (4) and (5) thereof are not to apply in respect of purchases of sugarcane made on or after the date of the commence­ment of the Amending Act, which was 29th December, 1975; that sub-section (5) of Section 21 was the provision that required the payment of interest on arrears of tax; and that, having regard to the inapplicability of that provision for the relevant period, no interest could be levied. The High Court in the principal judg­ment, which was followed in the subsequent orders, took the view that the scope of sub-section (3D) of Section 21 and its applica­tion was restricted to the crushing season 1975-76 during which the Amending Act had come into force.

4. The said Act is a taxing statute and a taxing statute must be interpreted as it reads, with no additions and no subtractions, on the ground of legislative intendment or other­wise.

5. On the plain wording of clause (a) of sub-section (3D) of Section 21 of the Act as amended, we find it difficult to agree with the High Court. The provisions thereof say that sub-section (5) shall not apply in relation to tax levied under sub-section (1) of Section 21 on purchase of sugarcane. The provisions came into force on the date of the commencement of the Amending Act. the provisions are open ended and are intended to apply upon the commencement of the Amending Act with no limitation in time.

6. T





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top