Back
ANITA SUMANTH, G. ARUL MURUGAN
Tvl. Sri Manickka Vinayagar Spinning Mills Ltd. , rep. by Director Vetrivelkannan – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer (FAC) – Respondent
ORDER :
(Order of the Court was made by Dr.ANITA SUMANTH., J)
PRAYER : PETITION filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records on the file of the respondent herein in CST 146752/2001-02 dated 26.12.2003 and quash the same in so far as levy of higher rate of tax of 10% on the petitioner's inter-state sales turnover of polyester fibre yarn of Rs.1,20,64,407.00 as against the Notification No.II(1)/CTRE/43(d-7)/98 issued in G.O.Ms.No.111, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments, dated 7.4.98 as amended in Notification No.II(1)/CT/40(a-4)/99 issued in G.O.Ms.No.61, Commercial Taxes, dated 17.3.99 reducing rate of tax to 2% on the inter-state sale of polyester fibre yarn by any dealer who does not have any branch transfer or consignment transfer during the year.
The assessment in this matter relates to the period 2001-02 (period in question). The impugned order of assessment dated 26.12.2003 has been passed under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (in short 'TNGST Act').
2. The petitioner is a manufacturer and dealer in polyester fibre yarn. In respect of the period in question, it had of
The Notification under Section 8(5) of the CST Act operates independently, allowing a reduced tax rate without the conditions of Section 8(4) applying.
The court upheld the Tax Board's interpretation of tax exemption calculations based on percentage increases in inter-State sales, affirming that authorities acted within the notification's spirit.
The amendment to Section 8(5) of the CST Act applies prospectively and does not retroactively affect vested rights to tax exemption granted prior to the amendment.
Rigid time limits for filing declaration forms under tax acts cannot be enforced if they conflict with statutory provisions allowing flexibility in submissions.
The court ruled that non-furnishing of 'C' Forms by a purchaser due to financial distress does not absolve entitlement to tax exemptions under Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
The amendment to Section 8(5) of the CST Act does not retrospectively affect previously granted tax exemptions, which remain valid unless revoked with notice.
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
