VARALAKSHMI OIL REFINERIES P LTD Vs. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER O/O THE DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER JAYAKONDAN PERAMBALUR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed OP. No. 397 of 2003 before the Special Tribunal praying to call for the records from the file of the respondent relating to notice in TNGST 3620983/2002-2003 dated 28.03.2003 and set aside the same as illegal. That OP stands numbered as this writ petition on being transferred to the file of this Court.

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

(3.) What is put in issue is a notice dated 28.03.2003 issued by the assessing officer demanding a sum of Rs. 59,06,992/- from the petitioner on the ground that though the petitioner availed waiver of tax as per the agreement entered into, contrary to the agreement, the petitioner has started despatching the goods manufactured by it as consignment sale. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to the sales tax deferral. The correctness of the notice is canvassed in this writ petition on the ground that on the interpretation of the notification, it could be seen that the benefit is available on the goods produced by the unit and not the way in which it was disposed off. The issue is settled by the Supreme Court in the cases of Hansraj Gordhandas V/s. H.H. Dave Assistant Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Surat ; and Commercial Taxes Officer, Jodhpur V/s. Vishnu Metals, 2006 148 STC 634. A Division Bench of this Court also considered a similar issue in the case of Union of India V/s. Chemfab Alkalis Limited, 2003 129 STC 427in which case incidentally I spoke for the Bench holding in favour of the assessee.