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

1970 Supreme(All) 36

R.L.Gulati, Satish Chandra, JJ.
MAHADEO RAM RAM JATAN
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P.
Misc. S.T.R. No. 454 of 1969
Decided On: Decided On : 23-02-1970

Advocates Appeared:
Shyam Narain and T. N. Parwar, for the applicants.
The Standing Counsel, for the opposite party.

JUDGMENT

The judgment of the court was delivered by

GULATI, J. - This is a reference under section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act read with section 9(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act submitted by the Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Varanasi, for the opinion of this court on the following two questions of law :-

"(1) Whether the applicant-firm is entitled to obtain 'C' forms even when the firm has ceased to exist for their old purchases ?

(2) Whether this firm is authorised for the issuance of 'C' forms for supplying them to the various parties having its old registration number ?"

It appears that a partnership firm carried on business in kairana at Ballia. It was registered under the Central Sales Tax Act. On 6th December, 1967, one of its partners died and the firm was reconstituted by the remaining partners which continued the business in the firm name of M/s. Mahadeo Ram Ram Jatan Ram. At the time of the reconstitution of the firm the registration certificate in the name of the old firm as also the 'C' forms obtained in the name of the old firm which were lying unused were surrendered to the Sales Tax Officer. Later on, however, it was discovered that in respect of certain purchases already made by the old firm, 'C' forms had not been sent to the parties from whom the goods were purchased and as such 'C' forms were demanded by the parties concerned. Thereupon the partners of the old firm made an application to the Sales Tax Officer to reissue the requisite number of 'C' forms out of the forms which had been surrendered. This request was turned down by the Sales Tax Officer, and the Judge (Revisions) also, before whom the matter came up in revision, found himself unable to accede to the request. The Judge (Revisions) stated that hardship would be caused to the partners of the old firm but there is no provision under the Central Sales Tax Act which authorises the issuance of 'C' forms in the circumstances of the case. At the instance of the assessee the present reference has been made to this court.

Under sub-section (1) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, tax is payable on inter-State sale at a concessional rate when such sales are made to a registered dealer, who furnishes to the selling dealer a declaration in accordance with sub-section (4) of section 8. In the absence of a declaration, the rate of sales tax is 10 per cent. The certificate contemplated by sub-section (4) of section 8 is to be filed in a prescribed form which under the rules is called form 'C'. It is clear that the old firm in the instant case which was a registered dealer had purchased certain goods from dealers in other States on the basis of its registration certificate, but had not supplied the requisite 'C' forms to the sellers. Had the firm not been reconstituted such 'C' forms would have been furnished in due course. Even after the reconstitution of the firm, 'C' forms which had previously been issued in the name of the old form could have been furnished to the selling dealers. There would have been no difficulty in that procedure. The difficulty has arisen because the 'C' forms issued in the name of the old firm were surrendered. The sales tax authorities formed the opinion that the 'C' forms could be issued to a registered dealer and inasmuch as the old firm had been dissolved, 'C' forms could be not issued in the name of the dissolved firm.

It is true that the rules contemplated the issuance of 'C' forms to an existing registered dealer, but the difficulty which has arisen in the instant case is not unsurmountable. In the first place, the request which the partners of the erstwhile firm made was not for the issuance of fresh 'C' forms but only for the reissuance of the forms which had already been issued in the name of the old firm and which by mistake had been surrendered. There is no prohibition in the Act or in the Rules against reissuance of forms which have been surrendered by mistake. Secondly, there is in the U.P. Sales Ta







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