Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 508 (MAD)

STATE OF TAMIL NADU v. GUPTHA ENTERPRISES.

2002-06-24

N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, V.S.SIRPURKAR

body2002
ORDER N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN, J. - This revision is filed under the provisions of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1982-83. There was a raid in the business premises of the dealer and the Enforcement Wing Officials, in their report dated February 28, 1987, reported to the assessing officer that the dealer effected inter-State sales of the goods from its Madras Office to Tvl. Venkateswara System Co. Ltd., Agartala, Andhra Pradesh, for a sum of Rs. 73,950 up to November 16, 1986. The Sales Tax Officer, on the basis of the report of the Enforcement Wing Officials and after giving an opportunity to the dealer treated the same as inter-State sale and levied the tax on the same. The dealer preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the dealer produced xerox copy of the order of final assessment by the Commercial Tax Officer, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh where the sales turnover relating to the same sale was subjected to tax under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not agree with the submission of the dealer on the score that the dealer had not produced the books of account maintained in its business, and dismissed the appeal. The dealer carried the matter in appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal recorded a finding that the turnover in question was assessed to tax under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and hence, the question of taxing the same turnover in Tamil Nadu does not arise. The Tribunal also recorded a finding that the transaction referred to was effected from Andhra Pradesh and hence, it is not taxable under the relevant provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act in Tamil Nadu and allowed the appeal preferred by the dealer. It is against the order of the Tribunal, the present revision is preferred. We heard Mrs. Saraswathi Sivaraman Iyer, learned Government Advocate (Taxes) and Mr. A. Suresh, learned counsel for the respondent. We are of the view that the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the sales emanated from Andhra Pradesh and it is not a turnover liable to be taxed under the relevant provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act in Tamil Nadu is a pure question of fact. A. Suresh, learned counsel for the respondent. We are of the view that the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the sales emanated from Andhra Pradesh and it is not a turnover liable to be taxed under the relevant provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act in Tamil Nadu is a pure question of fact. The Tribunal has considered the assessment order made by the assessing officer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and on that basis, recorded a finding that the sale was effected from Andhra Pradesh and it was not an inter-State sale. We find that the said finding is based on material as the Tribunal has drawn its inference from the order of assessment made on the dealer under the relevant provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act to hold that the sale was an intra-State sale in that State and not an inter-State sale emanated from this State. Since the finding of the Appellate Tribunal is based on material, we do not find that any question of law arises out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal for our consideration. Accordingly, the revision stands dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed.