STATE OF A.P. Vs. HINDUSTAN CABLES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The six revisions are preferred by the State-Revenue against the common order dated September 2, 1998 of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, allowing the appeals by the common assessee-M/s. Hindustan Cables Limited, Cherlapally. The question of law presented for consideration in these revisions filed under section 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the 1957 Act"), is whether even in the absence of a provision under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, "the CST Act"), for forfeiture of excess tax collected by a registered dealer, forfeiture could be ordered by recourse to the provisions under the 1957 Act.

(2.) The relevant facts in brief may be noticed. The Commercial Tax Officer, Nacharam, during his visit to the administrative office of the assessee on different dates, verified the sale invoices issued by the assessee during April, 1996 to September, 1996 and noticed that the assessee collected taxes in excess of the tax remitted to the Revenue. The authority therefore proposed to forfeit the excess tax collections. The assessee in response claimed that it had only mentioned the sales tax component in the invoices but the same were not collected; and that forfeiture could be resorted to only when excess tax is collected and not deposited to the Revenue, not when merely mentioned in the bills. The assessing authority however concluded that the assessee had collected CST in excess of what was paid to the Revenue and passed an order of forfeiture, in purported exercise of the powers under section 30B(2) read with section 30C of the 1957 Act and ordered forfeiture.

(3.) The appeals preferred by the assessee to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, CT, Hyderabad Rural Division, having been rejected, the assessee preferred further appeals to the Tribunal. The Tribunal observed that there was no substantive provision for forfeiture of sales tax under the CST Act and the provision under section 10 of the said Act for action by way of penalties against contravention of the provision of section 9A of the CST Act does not include forfeiture, held that the Revenue cannot invoke provisions of the 1957 Act under section 9(2A) of the CST Act, to order forfeiture. The assessee's appeals were accordingly allowed.