W.P. (C) No. 96 of 2014. Case: K.D. Industries Vs The State of Tripura and Ors. Tripura High Court

Case NumberW.P. (C) No. 96 of 2014
Party NameK.D. Industries Vs The State of Tripura and Ors
CounselFor Appellant: S.M. Chakraborty, Senior Advocate and Suman Bhattacharjee, Advocate and For Respondents: D.C. Nath, Advocate
JudgesT. Vaiphei, C.J. and S. Talapatra, J.
IssueTripura Sales Tax, 1976 - Sections 2(b), 21(2), 25, 25(4), 3AA, 9(3)
Judgement DateJanuary 13, 2017
CourtTripura High Court

Judgment:

S. Talapatra, J., (At Agartala)

  1. By means of the writ petition, the petitioner, M/s. K.D. Industries, which is a 'dealer' within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the Tripura Sales Tax, 1976, in short, TST Act, has challenged the order dated 19.12.2013 delivered in Revision Case No. 04/CH-VII/08/343-46 by the Commissioner of Taxes, the Revisional Authority, whereby the challenge to the order of assessment dated 29.10.2008 for the assessment year 2000-01 passed under Section 21(2) of the TST Act has been discarded by affirmance.

  2. The essential fact may be introduced at the outset for purpose of appreciating the challenge.

    The Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-VII had assessed the petitioner on 29.10.2008 under Section 9(3) of the TST Act and raised the demand to the tune of ` 5,40,661.00 on the basis of the purported assessment for the assessment year 2000-01. Even though a sum of ` 1,74,588.00 was deducted as tax at source by the Deputy General Manager, Electrical Division No. III on 30.03.2001 from the bill of supply of PCC poles and the said transaction fell within the turnover for the assessment year 2000-01, the Deduction Certificate, commonly known as the TDS Certificate, was issued on 27.12.2008 i.e. after the assessment was made. Non-production of the Deduction Certificate during the assessment is the root of the controversy leading to institution of this writ petition.

  3. The assessment was completed on 29.10.2008 raising the said demand. But the assessing authority did not include the said tax to the extent of ` 1,74,588.00 on the account of tax paid by the dealer, the petitioner herein, and the said amount of tax has been shown as the outstanding in the account of the petitioner and accordingly the interest has been raised on the said amount. How the assessment has been made is available in the order of assessment and which is as under:

  4. It is apparent from the table as reproduced above from the order of assessment that the total turnover has been accepted at ` 1,19,97,410.00. Thus, the tax payable was determined at ` 14,39,689.20. The tax paid by challan was ` 2,55,565.00, whereas the tax paid through the deduction at source is ` 10,03,653.00. Thus, the assessing authority determined the tax to be paid at ` 1,80,471.00. On the basis of the said determination, the interest to be paid was ascertained at ` 3,42,142.93. Thus, a demand of ` 5,40,661.00 was raised inclusive of the interest and penalty of ` 18,047.10. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial