Important Point – Only complete sales are exigible to Sales Tax.

(Per S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.)

1) Rule in both Petitions. Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2) By these Writ Petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks the following reliefs (WP/7400/2015):-

“(a) that this Hon'ble Court be leased to declare that the impugned Trade Circular No. 2T of 2010 dated 11.01.2010 is without jurisdiction, and is ultra vires Section 6A of the Act and is of no effect and accordingly, set aside the same;

(b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to further declare that the circular no. 16T of 2007 dated 20.2.2007 read with Circular No. 5T of 2009 dated 29.1.2009 alone are legal, valid and correct;

(c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the Section 6A is inapplicable to interstate movement of final goods returned by a job workers to his customer, after job work.

(d) In the alternative and without prejudice to prayer (c) above, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that Section 6A is ineffective, incomplete and inoperative is of no avail.

(e) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records pertaining to the Petitioner's case and after going into the legality and validity thereof to quash and set aside impugned order dated 17.07.2015 passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No.447/2015 and impugned Assessment Order dated 14.08.2014;

(f) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondents by themselves, their officers and subordinates (i) to withdraw and/or cancel impugned order dated 17.07.2015 passed by the Tribunal in appeal No. 447/2015 and impugned Assessment Order dated 14.08.2014; and (ii) to refrain from taking any steps or proceedings in pursuance of and/or in furtherance of and/or in implementation of the (i) impugned Trade Circular No. 2T of 2010 dated 11.01.2010 (ii) Impugned order dated 17.07.2015 passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No. 447/2015 and (iii) impugned Assessment Order dated 14.08.2014.”

3) The Petitioner before us is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are all exercising powers and discharging functions under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (for short “the MVAT Act”).

4) The Petitioner holds a registration number as set out in para 4 of the Petition. It is claimed that the Petitioner is manufacturer and job worker, engaged in the manufacture of different grades of support catalyst, including activated charcoal support. It is stated that this is predominantly a process resulting in the production of recharged catalyst from spent catalyst. It is stated that the Petition relates to job work transactions. The Petitioner receives a specified quantity of spent catalyst from its customers from within as well as outside the state of Maharashtra. The Petitioner undertakes job work of converting the spent catalyst received from the customers into support catalyst and sends back the recharged support catalyst to such customers.

5) The mode of transactions undertaken between the Petitioner and its customers is described in para 6 of the Petition. From para 7 onwards, the Petitioner describes what is a catalyst and what is a support catalyst. We are not inclined to refer to all the details for the simple reason that the Petitioner claims that the process followed under the Central Excise Act, 1944 of receiving the spent catalyst and issuing processed catalyst is set out so as to appreciate that the Petitioner undertakes job work transactions and for which excise duty is not required to be paid.

6