Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
LEATHER FACTS CO.
DATE OF JUDGMENT24/03/1987
BENCH:
THAKKAR, M.P. (J)
BENCH:
THAKKAR, M.P. (J)
RAY, B.C. (J)
CITATION:
1987 AIR 1343 1987 SCR (2) 630
1987 SCC (2) 380 JT 1987 (1) 807
1987 SCALE (1)659
ACT:
Central Sales Tax Act, 1956--Section 5(3)--Transaction
of sale/ purchase ’in course of export’--Not exigible to
tax--Use of Form IlIA under Rule 12--A of U.P. Sales Tax
Act, 1948 by trader--Whether State empowered to levy tax.
U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948--Rule 12-A Form III--A--Trader
using such Form--Whether liable to tax on transactions ’in
course of export.’
HEADNOTE:
The respondent, a dealer in hides and skins and export-
ing the same out of the territory of India, entered into
transactions failing within the purview of sub-section (3)
of Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and which
could not be taxed because of constitutional bar under
Article 286( 1 )(a) of the Constitution of India, furnished
Form III-A under Rule 12-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, as an
appropriate form to meet the situation was not devised under
the U.P. Sales Tax Act, and sought a clarification from the
Commissioner, Sales Tax, as to whether the firm was liable
to tax under Section 3-AAAA of the U.P. Sales Tax Act on the
purchases made against Form III-A or H under the Central
Sales Tax Act, when such dressed hides and skins were ex-
ported beyond the territory of India. The Commissioner,
Sales Tax clarified and held that the purchases of dressed
hides and skins made against Form H were not liable to
purchase tax under Section 3-AAAA of the U.P. Sales Tax Act
provided the same were exported outside the territory of
India and the conditions laid down in Section 5(3) of the
Central Sales Tax Act were satisfied, but if the purchases
were made against Form III-A and exported outside the terri-
tory of India, they shall be liable to purchase tax under
Section 3-AAAA.
On appeal, the Sales Tax Tribunal held that the respond-
ent was not liable to any purchase tax under Section 3-AAAA
of the U.P. Sales Tax Act whether they were purchased
against or without Form III-A or H, as the same were export-
ed outside the territory of India in compliance with the
order received from the foreign buyers and those transac-
tions were exempted under Section 6 of the Central Sales Tax
Act.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
631
A Revision Petition filed before the High Court by the
appellant Revenue, contending that the decision of the
Tribunal was bad in law was dismissed.
Disposing of the appeal by the U.P. Sales Tax authori-
ties, this Court,
HELD: 1.1 The mere fact that Form III-A has been given
will not empower the State to collect or levy the sales
tax/purchase tax in respect of a transaction in the course
of export which satisfies the tests prescribed by Section
5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act. It would be unconstitu-
tional in view of the constitutional bar to levy tax on
sales in the course of export regardless of the fact whether
an appropriate form is used or not. [633E-F]
1.2 The transactions entered into by the respondent
which are such on which sales tax/purchase tax cannot be
levied on account of the constitutional bar read with sub-
section (3) of Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act,
cannot become exigible to tax merely because a wrong form is
used (particularly when the appropriate form has not been
devised by the rule making authority). [633F-G]
1.3 Liability for tax in respect of such transactions
cannot be fastened on the respondent for the very good
reason that the State has no power to collect or levy sales
tax/purchase tax on such transactions. The U.P. Sales Tax
authorities should have devised an appropriate form in this
behalf. They can do so even now (as has been done under the
Delhi Sales Tax Act, by prescribing Form 49 to meet such a
situation). [633G-H; 634A]
1.4 For the future purposes instead of furnishing Form
III-A under rule 12-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, the re-
spondent will furnish a photostat copy of Form H under the
Central Sales Tax Act. [634B]
So fas as the past transactions are concerned, the
respondent will not be liable provided the tests prescribed
under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, are satis-
fied. [634D]
Consolidated Coffee Ltd. v. Coffee Board, Bangalore,
A.I.R. (Vol. 46) p. 164 refferred to.
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 350 (NT)
of 1987.
632
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.11. 1985 of the
Allahabad in S.T.R. No. 401 of 1985.
S.C. Manchanda and Ashok K. Srivastava for the Appellant.
Raja Ram Agarwal, Ajay Kumar Jain, Pramod Dayal and A.D.
Sanger for the Respondent.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
THAKKAR, J. A transaction of sale or purchase which
takes place ’in the course of export’ falling within the
purview of sub-section (3) of Section 51 of the Central
Sales-tax Act. 1956 (hereinafter called the ’Act’) cannot be
subjected to sales-tax by any State. The said provision
inter alia provides that the last sale or purchase of any
goods preceding the sale or purchase occasioning the export
of those goods out of the territory of India shall also be
deemed to be in the course of such export.
(i) provided such last sale or purchase took place ’after’
and
(ii) was for the purpose of complying with, the agreement
or order for or in relation to such export
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
Such a transaction cannot be subjected to sales tax/purchase
tax by any State in view of the embargo imposed by Art.
286(1) (a).1 The controversy centering around this question
has been set at rest in Consolidated Coffee Ltd. v . Coffee
Board, Bangalore, A.I.R. (Vol. 46) p. 164. Under the circum-
stances, if the last sale in favour of the respondent who is
a dealer in hides and skins and exports the same out of the
territory of India has taken place (1) after an agreement
was entered
When a sale or purchase of goods said to take place in the
course of import or export --(1) X X X X (2) X X X (3)
Notwithstanding anything contained m’ sub-section(1), the
last sale or purchase of any goods preceding the sale or
purchase occasioning the export of those goods out of the
territory of India shall also be deemed to be in the course
of such export, if such last sale or purchase took place
after and was for the purpose of complying with, the agree-
ment or order for or in relation to such export."
1. "286(1) (a) No law of a State shall impose, or authorise
the imposition of a tax on the sale or purchase of goods
where such sale or purchase takes place--
(a) outside the State; or
(b) in the course of the import of the goods, or export of
the goods out, of the territory of India.
633
into for such export or order for such export had been
accepted by him. (2) last sale made in his favour was for
the purpose of complying with the obligation undertaken
under the said agreement or order, the transaction reflected
in such last sale or purchase cannot be lawfully taxed under
the Sales Tax Act. It cannot be taxed because of the consti-
tutional bar embodied in Article 286 (1) (a) of the Consti-
tution of India. The view taken by the High Court in the
Judgment under appeal that such transactions are not exigi-
ble to sales tax/purchase tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act,
is unexceptionable in the light of the aforesaid provisions
of the Constitution and sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the
Act and the law declared by this Court in Consolidated
Coffee Ltd. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere with
the order of the High Court.
It is no doubt true that Form III-A under Rule 12-A of
the U.P. Sales Tax Act is not an appropriate form to use in
the context of such a transaction of last sale or purchase
for the purpose of complying with an agreement or order for
export which has already come into existence. However, it is
equally true that an appropriate form to meet the situation
in relation to such last sales which are not exigible to
sales/ purchase tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act having
regard to the constitutional bar and having regard to the
provision contained in sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the
Act has not been devised under the afore-said Rules. It was
under these circumstances that the respondent has furnished
to his vendors form III-A which is not appropriate except in
regard to purchases made for sales of undressed hides as
such within the State or in the course of inter-State trade.
But the mere fact that such a form has been given will not
empower the State to collect or levy the sales tax/purchase
tax in respect of a transaction in the course of export
which satisfies the aforesaid tests prescribed by Section 5
(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act. It would be unconstitu-
tional in view of the constitutional bar to levy tax on
sales in the course of export regardless of the fact whether
an appropriate form is used or not. The transactions entered
into by him which are such on which sales tax/purchase tax
cannot be levied on account of the constitutional bar read
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
with sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax
Act cannot become exigible to tax merely because a wrong
form is used (particularly when the appropriate form has not
been devised by the Rule making authority). Liability for
tax in respect of such transactions cannot be fastened on
the respondent for the very good reason that the State has
no power to collect or levy sales tax/purchase tax on such
transactions. The U.P. Sales Tax authorities should have
devised an appropriate form in this behalf. They can do so
even now (as has
634
been done under the Delhi Sales Tax Act by prescribing Form
49 to meet such a situation). Learned counsel for the appel-
lant submits that till such a form is prescribed the re-
spondent who claims to have entered into these transactions
in the course of export as defined by sub-section (3) of
Section 5 of the Act may furnish to his vendor a copy of
Form-H as provided by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The
respondent has no objection and is prepared to do so. Under
the circumstances, for the future purposes instead of fur-
nishing form III-A under Rule 12-A of the Sales Tax
Act, .the respondent will furnish a photostat copy of form H
under the Central Sales Tax Act. Learned counsel for the
respondent states that if such a copy is furnished to the
vendor it will be accepted by the competent authority and
the vendor will not be held liable for payment of sales
tax/purchase tax in respect of such transactions subject to
the rider that respondent will be held liable in case the
purchases made by him do not satisfy the conditions and
tests prescribed by sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the
Central Sales Tax Act and are not made in the course of
export within the meaning of the said provision. So far as
the past transactions are concerned the respondent will not
be liable provided he satisfies the aforesaid tests and the
transactions of last sales made to him are in the course of
export within the deeming clause of sub-section (3) of
Section 5 of the Act.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly. There will be no
order as to costs.
N.P. V Appeal dis-
posed of.
635