ORDER Mrs. B. V. Nagarathna - The assessee has filed this revision petition by challenging the order dated July 22, 2008 passed in S.T.A. No. 509 of 2007 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, by raising the following substantial questions of law : "(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in having held that the petitioner was not entitled to concessional rate of tax at four per cent under section 8(1) of the CST Act, 1956, on the sales turnover of Rs. 25,62,535 for which C forms have been obtained and furnished ? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Bangalore, in CST AP No. 06/07-08 and the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Transition 3), Bangalore, levying tax on the sales turnover of Rs. 25,62,535 at 15 per cent ?" The facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and a dealer registered under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, engaged in the manufacture and sale of ceramic wall and floor tiles and the said products are sold by way of inter-State sales as well, as export sales and locally also. During the relevant assessment period 2002-03, the petitioner sold certain ceramic tiles to a registered dealer at Tirupati, namely, M/s. Keerti tiles at a concessional rate of tax subject to furnishing C forms as provided under section 8(1) read with section 8(3) of the CST Act. The petitioner produced the said C forms and claimed that tax on the turnover supported by C forms has to be at concessional rate of four per cent. The assessing authority, however, granted the concessional rate of tax for the turnover up to June 30, 2002 at four per cent and for the subsequent period levied full tax at 15 per cent by holding that the buyer had cancelled its certificate of registration with effect from July 1, 2002 and therefore C forms issued by it to the petitioner for the period subsequent to July 1, 2002 were invalid and accordingly completed the assessment order dated January 30, 2006. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Bangalore, which was however dismissed, against which an appeal was filed before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated July 22, 2008, upheld the orders passed by the first appellate authority by dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said order, this petition has been filed. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondent - State and perused the material on record. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the concessional rate of tax is subject to furnishing of C forms, which had to be obtained by the petitioner from the various persons who are registered dealers in other States to whom the goods are sold and on furnishing of the said C forms, concessional rate of tax at four per cent is levied instead of 15 per cent. That in respect of goods sold to M/s. Keerti Tiles for the period prior to July 1, 2002 and subsequent to the said period C forms had been furnished by the registered dealer at Tirupati, which were produced before the assessing authority in order to claim the concessional rate of tax but the said authority did not accept the said C forms as valid as the registered dealer at Tirupati had cancelled its registration with effect from July 1, 2002. He submits that if that was really the position, then C forms had to be withdrawn by the registered dealer at Tirupati and the assessee could not be penalised for producing C forms which were issued by the registered dealer at Tirupati in respect of the goods which were purchased subsequent to July 1, 2002, if really the said dealer had cancelled its registration on the said date. Therefore he submits that the orders of all the authorities as well as the Tribunal have to be set aside and penalty levied on the assessee has to be dropped and the concessional rate of tax has to be applied in the instant case. Therefore he submits that the orders of all the authorities as well as the Tribunal have to be set aside and penalty levied on the assessee has to be dropped and the concessional rate of tax has to be applied in the instant case. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader, while supporting the orders passed by the Tribunal and other authorities, has stated that when once the dealer at Tirupati had ceased to exist with effect from July 1, 2002, the C forms could not have been issued by it and the assessee herein could not have relied on the said forms for calculating concessional rate of tax. He therefore submits that the order impugned does not call for any interference in this petition. Having heard the counsel on both sides and on perusal of the material on record, we find that the petitioner had sold goods to the registered dealer at Tirupati for the period prior to July 1, 2002 as well as subsequent to the said period coming within the assessment period 2002-03 and that in respect of the said sales made, if the dealer at Tirupati had issued C forms and based on that concessional rate of tax was claimed by the petitioner without knowing as to whether the dealer at Tirupati has ceased to exist from July 1, 2002, then it cannot be held that the C forms issued by the dealer at Tirupati were invalid. It is not for the assessee to actually find out as to whether the registered dealer was in existence as on the date when the sales were effected when in fact, the registered dealer who is the purchaser has issued C forms to the assessee. If really the registered dealer to whom the sale has been made had ceased to exist from July 1, 2002, then in accordance with the provisions of law, the said forms could not have been made use by the purchaser and handed over to the petitioner - assessee. If at all there has been any violation committed by the purchaser in the instant case, the petitioner - assessee cannot be found fault with since it was the duty of the purchaser to have informed the petitioner about its ceasing to be in existence and thereby not issuing C forms. If at all there has been any violation committed by the purchaser in the instant case, the petitioner - assessee cannot be found fault with since it was the duty of the purchaser to have informed the petitioner about its ceasing to be in existence and thereby not issuing C forms. The petitioner has utilized the C forms issued by the registered dealer who is a purchaser based on the fact that the said purchaser has been in existence and has validly issued the said forms. Therefore the authorities could not have been held that the petitioner had utilized the invalid C forms in order to claim concessional rate of tax. Moreover, in the absence of there being any proof that the purchasing dealer had ceased to exist on July 1, 2002 and that the said fact was within the knowledge of the petitioner herein in the absence of such circumstances, the authorities had to levy tax at the concessional rate of four per cent on the basis of the C forms relied upon by the assessee and further the proceedings initiated with regard to the levy of penalty is also not in accordance with law. For the aforesaid reasons, the orders passed in the instant case are set aside and the petition is allowed.