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

1969 Supreme(Mad) 435

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MR.JUSTICE T. Ramaprasada Rao and MR.JUSTICE .G. Ramanujam.
Madura Mills Company Ltd.
Versus
Government of Madras, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madurai Division, Madurai
T.C. No. 51 of 1966. (Revision No. 26 of 1966)
Decided On : 20 November 1969

Advocates:
T. N. C. Rangarajan for M/s. King and Partridge, for Petitioner.
K. Venkatasami, the First Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondents.

Prescription of time-limit for filing ’C’ forms is ultra vires.

Headnote:Central Sales Tax Act (LXXIV of 1956), sections 8 (4) and 13 (3) and (4)

       - Central Sales Tax Rules (Madras) (1957), rule 5 - Madras General Sales Tax Act (I of 1959)" - Section 3 and Schedule II, Serial No. 3---Prescription of time-limit for filing ’C’ forms is ultra vires - Forms filed in reasonable time before assessment is made or made known to assessee.

The Order of the Court was made by covered by ‘ C ‘ forms, the same was subject to the non-concessional rate of 7 per cent and the petitioner was assesseed to Central Sales Tax. In the turnover so excluded from the benefit of the statutory concession, it is claimed that a sum of Rs. 4,68,399-54 represented the sales turnover of cotton tyre Cord warp sheet. This is however subject to vertification. The petitioner’s further case is that in so far as the turnover of Rs. 5,29,652-57 out of Rs. 5,32,910-05 is concerned it did produce the ‘ C ‘ forms, not along with the return, but at some later point of time, either before or immediately after the final assessment order. The assessing officer rejected the claim of the assessee to be taxed at the lower rate of 1 per cent. because the ‘ C ‘ forms were not filed in time and due diligence was not exercised in the matter of their filing. On appeal it was expressly contended that cotton tyre Cord warp sheet is not a woven fabric but is really cotton yarn. It was further argued that (a) for the turnover of Rs. 11,159-75 included in the disputed turnover the assessee’s case is that the ‘ C ‘ forms were filed along with the returns. Ultimately they were not traced in the office of the Department. It could not therefore get relief before the assessing Officer. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, however, duplicate ‘ C ‘ forms were obtained and filed before the Appellate Authority on 24th January, 1964.

(b) Regarding the turnover of Rs. 2,52,311-80 forming part of the disputed turnover, the ‘ C ‘ forms were filed after pre-assessment notices were issued by the assessing authority and before it passed the order.

(c) Regarding the turnover of Rs. 1,53,154-90 forming part of the disputed turnover, the ‘ C ‘ forms are purported to have been filed after the order was passed but before it was received.

(d) Regarding the turnover of Rs. 1,13,026-12 forming part of the disputed turnover, the ‘ C ’ forms were filed after the receipt of the order but they were returned and not entertained by the Appellate Authority even when tendered before it.

Certain dates are relevant to appreciate the factual contentions regarding the production of ‘ C ‘ forms by the assessee. As already noticed, the ‘ C ‘ forms for the turnover of Rs. 11,150-75 are reported to have been filed along with the returns but they were not ultimately traced and therefore considered as lost. On 23rd September, 1963, the assessee received the pre-assessment notice. On 27th September, 1963, the assessee requested for time for production of the necessary ‘ C ‘ forms and for furnishing other particulars till 15th October, 1963. On 20th September, 1963, ‘ C ’ forms for Rs. 2,52,311.80 were filed. On 30th September, 1963, the order of assessment was made. On 13th October 1963, and before the receipt of the order, ‘ C ‘forms for Rs. 1,53,154-90 were filed. On 16th October, 1963, the order was received. Thereafter, on 2nd and 6th November, 1963, ‘ C ‘ forms for Rs. 1,13,026.12 were filed.

The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the appeal in toto. On a further appeal to the Tribunal, it was of the view that the cotton tyre cord warp sheet was neither yarn nor fabric, but is a species of its own, uncovered by the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act; it was of the view that cotton type cord was sheet (hereinafter referred to as cord) is an independent item of goods coming within the general purview of goods and as such goods are assessable to multi-point levy under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, they are liable to Central Sales Tax at the rate of 2 per cent. possibly by the operation of section 8 (2-A) read with section 9 (3) of the Centra1 Sales Tax Act. It finds that ‘cord’ means twisted thread; but, as yarn is spun thread, ‘cord ‘ cannot include yarn. It however, incorrectly observed that no objection was raised by the petitioner to the effect that ‘cord’ should be classified as cotton yarn. As a matter of fact, this was the bur
















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top