SRI DIPAK BHATTACHARJEE Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these matters are being disposed of by a common judgment since the issue involved in all the writ petitions is the same. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are either the owners of vehicles which were used to transport goods or were the agents who arranged for the transportation of goods in trucks owned by other persons. By means of the impugned orders Value Added Tax has been levied and deducted. The Revenue has come to the conclusion that the TVAT is leviable on the ground that the agreement for transportation of goods amounts to sale within the meaning of the TVAT Act.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that food grains which were meant for Public Distribution System (PDS) were transported to various places within the State of Tripura by use of trucks either owned by the petitioners or arranged by them. The short question involved is whether this contract by which the petitioners had agreed to transport the goods amounts to sale within the meaning of the TVAT Act or not.

(3.) WE are clearly of the view that the phrase "transfer of property in goods" has been expanded in the context of works contract to include those goods which are used in the execution of the works contract. This expansion of the definition can however not bring within its ambit the mere transportation of goods. When a person transports goods on behalf of the consigner or the consignee there is no transfer in the property of goods either directly or by inference. A contract to transport goods from one place to another is not a works contract. The amount which a transporter receives may be included in the sale value for calculating the taxable turnover but by no stretch of imagination can the transporter be held liable to pay tax? We are, therefore, clearly of the view that the deduction of tax on the amount paid to the transporters/petitioners is illegal and is liable to be quashed and the same is accordingly quashed. The tax which has been deducted shall be refunded to the petitioners along with statutory interest within 3(three) months from today failing which the State shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum. In case there are any taxes due from any of the petitioners the State shall be at liberty to adjust the refundable amount against the taxes due from the petitioners to the State. Dr. Ashok Saraf, learned Sr. Advocate, has made a submission that the petitioners be directed to give the details of the vehicles used in transportation of goods along with the names of the owners of the vehicles so that the entire transactions can be traced out. We see no problem in ordering that in case the assessing officers issues notices to the petitioners they shall give the details i.e. the registration number of the trucks used to transport the goods and the names of the owner of the vehicles used in transportation.