TATA MOTORS LIMITED Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner's contention throughout was that the petitioner's sale in question was the sale in the course of inter -State trade or commerce, of the articles which have been notified in the notification 2 dated 30.1.1993. The notification dated 30.1.1993 has been issued by the State Government in exercise of the power conferred by Clause (B) of subsection (5) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. By this notification, it has been provided that for all sales in course of inter -State trade or commerce irrespective of the buyers - whether it is Government or it is a registered dealer or unregistered dealer - if made of the articles mentioned in the notification dated 30.1.1993, then the rate of sale tax will be 4% in place of regular higher rate of tax. However, the petitioner's said contention was rejected by all the three authorities, i.e. Assessing Officer, Appellate Authority and the Tribunal and it has been held that for taking any benefit of the notification dated 30.1.1993, the dealer is required to submit Form C or D as the case may be and the petitioner should have furnished Form C without which it is not entitled to the benefit of the notification and consequently the petitioner has been levied with tax @ 10%/14.43% creating a total liability of Rs.54,96,61,740/.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State submitted that taxing provision is the subsection (1) and (2) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and one is required to be covered by either of the sales falling in the category of subsection (1) and/or subsection (2) of section 8 of the Act of 1956 and that once one is liable to pay tax under section 8, then the provision of exemption applies and subsection (4) of section 8 clearly provides that for sale or transaction made in course of inter -State trade or commerce, one is required to submit Form C or D, as the case may be, and subsection (4) clearly provides that subsection (1) shall not apply to any sale in course of inter -State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes the requisite particulars in Form C and D and therefore, when such certificate is not furnished, subsection (1) itself will not apply and thus, compliance of subsection (4) is mandatory in nature. It is submitted that in view of the above reasons and in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Sarvotam Vegetables Products (supra), the Tribunal rightly held that the petitioner is not entitled to exemption under the notification dated 30.1.1993.