Back
R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, HARINATH. N
Srinivasa Rice Mill – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer – Respondent
ORDER :
R. Raghunandan Rao, J.
All these Writ Petitions are being disposed of by way of this Common Order as they raise similar questions of fact and law.
2. Heard Sri S. Dwaraknath, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Srinivasa Rao Kudapudi, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax.
3. The petitioners, in all these cases are rice millers who are involved in the business of milling of rice and selling the said rice and broken rice to persons within the State and outside the State. They are registered under the Central Sales Tax, Act 1956 [for the “the CST, Act”]. The sales, in the present set of Writ Petitions, relate to sales undertaken under the CST, Act. The normal rate of tax payable by a dealer selling goods under the CST, Act would be 4/5% (The rate of 4% was increased to 5% on 15.09.2011). However, the dealers are permitted to pay tax, under the CST, Act, at a concessional rate of 2% if they were able to produce C-Forms issued by their purchasers affirming that the said goods would either be consumed by the purchasers or would be resold by the purchasers in their respective States.
4. A large number of rice millers an
Waivers under the CST Act can be granted without re-assessment if the conditions specified in government memos are satisfied.
Waivers under the CST Act can be granted without re-assessment if the conditions specified in government memos are met.
Rigid time limits for filing declaration forms under tax acts cannot be enforced if they conflict with statutory provisions allowing flexibility in submissions.
A party's financial hardship does not justify a waiver of statutory interest under the Income Tax Act, which demands adherence to specific CBDT criteria for such waivers.
The proof of payment for tax admitted is directory in nature, allowing amendments to the memorandum of appeal without barring access to statutory remedies.
The court established that the ultimate burden of tax determines the entitlement to refunds under the CST Act, regardless of the dealer's registration status.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that Section 61 of the RVAT Act, 2003 allows for the levy of penalty in cases of active concealment and deliberate fraud or misinformation by the A....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
