Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 11
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 2768 of 2000
PETITIONER:
M/s A.B.C. (India) Ltd.
RESPONDENT:
State of Assam & Anr.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/08/2005
BENCH:
S.N. Variava & Dr. AR. Lakshmanan
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
With Writ Petition (Civil) No. 622 of 2000
Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, J.
In Civil Appeal No. 2768 of 2000
This is an appeal filed against the judgment and order dated 4.1.2000 passed by
the Gauhati High Court in Writ Appeal No. 197 of 1996. The Division Bench while
allowing the appeal filed by the State of Assam held that the controversy raised in the
matter was covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Tripura Goods
Transport Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. , (1999) 2 SCC
253 and not in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr. (1993) 4
SCC 380.
The respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the seizure of
books of accounts and documents made by the authorities at the offices and godowns
of the respondents under the provisions of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993
(hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The respondents have also prayed for a
declaration that Sections 42 and 44 of the Act, as ultra vires.
The short facts for the purpose of disposal of this civil appeal are as follows:
The respondent is a company registered under the Companies Act engaged in
the business of transportation of goods on behalf of the customers throughout the
country. A Bill, namely, Assam General Sales Tax Bill, 1993 was passed in the Assam
Legislative Assembly and the Bill received the assent of the Governor on 14.5.1993 and
became an Act (Assam Act No. XII of 1993), for short "the Act,1993". This Act has
repealed all the earlier four Sales Tax Acts.
Sections 42 and 44 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 read as
under:
"Section 42 : Furnishing of information by clearing and
forwarding agent etc. \026
(1) Every clearing, booking or forwarding agent or
any other person transporting goods who during the
course of his business handles documents of title to
goods for or on behalf of any dalal or a person holding
certificate under Section 14 shall furnish to the
prescribed authority true and complete particulars and
information and shall maintain true and complete
accounts, registers and documents in respect thereof,
and if the prescribed authority considers that such
accounts, registers and documents are not sufficiently
clear and intelligible the said authority may direct any
clearing, booking or forwarding agent or dealer or the
persons transporting goods to produce and maintain
accounts in such manner as may be required.
(2) Such accounts shall, on demand, be produced
before the prescribed authority who may take or
cause to be taken such extracts as he may
consider necessary.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 11
(3) A person transporting goods shall carry a
declaration in such form as may be prescribed,
supported by either a cash memo, a bill or a
challan, in case the movement is otherwise a
result of sale, in respect of goods which is being
transported on a goods carrier, or a vessel and
shall produce such challan, cash memo or bill
along with the aforesaid declaration on demand
before the prescribed authority.
(4) If any clearing, booking or forwarding agent or
dalal or person transporting goods contravenes
the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 3 in a
manner which is likely to lead to evasion of any tax
payable under this Act, the prescribed authority
may, without prejudice to any action under
Sections 61 and 62 of this Act on the charge of
abatement, after giving the person concerned an
opportunity of being heard, direct him to pay by
way of penalty, an amount which shall be equal to
three times the amount of tax calculated on the
value of goods in respect of which no particulars or
information or correct particulars or information
has been furnished under sub-section (1) or no
cash memo or bill or challan has been produced
before the prescribed authority under sub-section
(3) or rupees one thousand whichever is greater:
Provided that notwithstanding anything contained in this sub-
section where the circumstances of the case or the checking
the goods carrier or vessels demands any action relating to
inspection, search and seizure of the goods loaded on the
goods carrier or vessel, by the prescribed authority, the
provisions of sub-sections (3), (5), (6) and (7) of Section 44
shall mutatis mutandis apply.
Explanation : - For the purpose of this sub-section
(i) "Dalal" shall include a person who renders his
services for booking of or taking delivery of
consignment of goods at a Railway Station,
booking agency, goods transport company
office, or any place of loading or unloading of
goods or contrives, makes and concludes
bargains and contracts for or on behalf of any
dealer for a fee, reward, commission,
remuneration or other valuable consideration or
otherwise.
(ii) ’person transporting goods’ shall, besides the
owner, include the manager, agent, driver,
employee of the owner, or person in charge of a
place of loading or unloading of goods other
than a rail head or a post office, or of a goods
carrier carrying such goods, or a person who
accepts consignments of such goods for
dispatch to other places or gives delivery of any
consignment of such goods to the consignee.
Section 44 - Production, inspection and seizure of
accounts documents and goods and search of premises \026
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 11
(1) Subject to such Rules as may be made by the State
Government under this Act, any authority, appointed under
sub-section (1) of Section 3, may, either before or after
assessment, require any dealer to produce before it or him
any accounts, registers or documents or to furnish any
information relating to the financial transactions of the dealer,
the profit derived from such transactions and the stock of
goods produced, raised, processed, manufactured, bought,
sold or delivered by such dealer and the dealer shall comply
with such requirement.
(2) Subject as aforesaid, all accounts registers and
documents relating to the financial transactions of a dealer,
the profit derived from such transactions and all goods kept in
any place of business or any dealer shall at all reasonable
times, be open for inspection by any authority appointed under
sub-section (1) of Section 3 and the dealer shall render all
possible assistance to such authority in carrying out the
inspection.
Explanation \026 Such authority may take or cause to be taken
such copies of, or extracts from the accounts, registers or
documents as such authority may consider necessary.
(3) If any authority appointed under sub-section (1) of the
section 3 has reason to suspect that any dealer is to evade
the payment of any tax or any clearing or forwarding agent
or a person transporting goods or any owner of a
warehouse or a godown is keeping or has kept his
accounting such a manner as is likely to cause evasion of
tax payable under this Act, such authority may for reasons
to be recorded in writing, seize such accounts, registers or
documents of the dealer or the clearing or forwarding agent
or the person transporting goods or the owner of a
warehouse or godown as may be necessary and shall
grant a receipt for the same, such seized accounts,
registers or documents shall be retained for so long as may
be reasonably necessary for examination thereof or for a
prosecution for any offence punishable under this Act and
shall thereafter be returned to the person concerned in the
prescribed manner:
Provided that if the seized accounts, registers or documents
are retained by any authority other than the Commissioner for
more than one hundred and twenty days, the reasons for so
doing shall be recorded in writing and the approval of the
Commissioner shall be obtained by the authority so retaining
them.
(4) For the purpose of sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) any
authority appointed under sub-section (1) of section (3)
may enter and search any place of business of any dealer.
(5)(a) Any authority referred to in sub-section (1) shall have
the power to enter into and search any office, shop, godown or
any other place of business or any building or any place of the
dealer, or of a dalal or of an owner of a warehouse, or of a
clearing, booking or forwarding agent, or of a person
transporting goods or vessels or goods carrier and seize any
goods which are found therein but not accounted for by the
dealer or the dalal, or the owner of the warehouse, or the
clearing, booking or forwarding agent, or the person
transporting goods in his books, accounts, registers and other
documents:
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 11
Provided that a list of all the goods seized under
this sub-section shall be prepared by such officers and be
signed by the officer, the dealer or the person in-charge of
goods or the person in charge of the premises and not less
than two witnesses.
(b) The authority referred to in clause (a) shall, in a case where the
dealer or the person in charge of goods as mentioned in clause
(a), fails to produce any evidence or satisfy the said authority
regarding the proper accounting of goods, impose a penalty,
after giving an opportunity of being heard to the dealer or such
person which shall be equal to three times the amount to tax
calculated on the value of such goods shall be released as soon
as the penalty is paid.
(c) If the dealer or the person in charge of goods as mentioned in
clause (a) demands time for production of necessary documents
in support of proper accounting, the authority referred to in
clause (a) shall release the goods on the condition that the
dealer or such a person deposits a security equivalent to three
times the amount of tax calculated on the value of the goods in
the form of a Demand Draft or a call deposit drawn on a
scheduled Bank.
(d) If penalty imposed under clause (b) is not paid forthwith or no
security is furnished as provided in clause (c) or the goods are
not claimed by any person, the authority referred to in clause (a)
shall arrange for the safe custody of the goods.
(e) In case the penalty imposed under clause (b) is not paid forthwith
or the goods remain unclaimed for a period of fifteen days from
the date of seizure, the goods so seized shall be sold by auction
in the prescribed manner and the sale proceeds shall be
appropriated towards the amount of penalty imposed under
clause (b); the balance of the sale proceeds if any, shall be
deposited in the Government Treasury and shall be refunded to
the lawful claimant in the prescribed manner.
(f) In a case where the goods have been released on the deposit of
a security as mentioned in clause (c) and evidence regarding
proper accounting of goods to the satisfaction of the authority
referred to in said clause (a) is not produced within fifteen days
from the date on which security is deposited, the amount of
security shall stand forfeited to the State Government. If,
however, evidence or document to the satisfaction of the
authority mentioned in clause (a) regarding the proper
accounting of goods is produced within the said period of fifteen
days, the security shall be released and the amount shall be
refunded with the approval of the next higher authority.
(6)(i) The power conferred by sub-sections (4) and (5)
shall include the power to break open the lock of
any box or receptacle or any other place or
premises where any accounts, registers or other
documents or goods may be kept or are
reasonably suspected to be kept;
(ii) The power conferred by sub-clause (i) shall also
include the power to seal any box or receptacle,
godown or building where any accounts,
registers or other documents or goods may be
kept or are reasonably suspected to be kept;
(7) an authority appointed under Section 3 may require the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 11
assistance of any public servant or police officer in making
search and seizure or for safe custody of goods seized under
the Section and such public servant or police officer shall
render necessary assistance in the matter."
Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 reads as under:
"Section 38 \026 Furnishing of information by clearing and
forwarding agents etc. \026 (1) every clearing or forwarding
agent, Dalal or any other person transporting goods, within the
State, who, during the course of his business, handles
documents of title to goods for or on behalf of any dealer, shall
furnish to the assessing authority the particulars and
information in respect of the transactions of the goods in such
form and manner, as may be prescribed.
(2) No clearing or forwarding agent, Dalal or any
other person transporting goods within the State shall carry on
his business unless he obtains from the assessing authority,
on payment of a fee not exceeding fifty rupees, a license in
the form and manner and subject to such conditions as may
be prescribed.
(3) If any clearing or forwarding agent or Dalal or
person transporting goods within the State contravenes the
provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the
Commissioner or any person appointed to assist him under
sub-section (1) of Section 3 may, after giving the person
concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard direct him
to pay by way of penalty, an amount equivalent to twenty per
centum of the value of goods in respect of which no particulars
and information has been furnished under sub-section (1).
Explanation - For the purpose of this section \026
(i) ’Dalal’ shall include a person who renders his services
for booking or, or taking delivery of, consignments of goods at
a Railway Station, booking agency, goods transport company
office, or any place of loading or unloading of goods or
contrives, makes and concludes bargains and contracts for or
on behalf of any dealer for a fee, reward, commission,
remuneration or other valuable consideration or otherwise;
(ii) ’person transporting goods’ shall, besides the owner,
include the manager, agent, driver, employee of the owner or
person incharge of a place of loading or unloading of goods or
of a Railway out-agency, city booking office or city booking
agency, when run by a private person under a contract with
the Railways but excluding a rail head or a post office, or of a
goods carrier carrying such goods, or a person who accepts
consignments of such goods for dispatch to other places or
gives delivery of any consignment of such goods to the
consignee."
Under Section 42 of the Act, it is an obligation on every clearing, booking or
forwarding agent or any other person transporting goods who during the course of his
business handles documents of title to goods for or on behalf of any dalal or a person
holding certificate under Section 14 to furnish to the prescribed authority true and
complete particulars and information and to maintain true and complete accounts,
registers, documents etc. The said section also provides for levy of penalty at the rate
of three times of tax calculated on the value of the goods in respect of which no
particulars or information have been furnished under sub-section (1) of Section 42 of
the Act or no cash memo or bill or challan has been produced before the prescribed
authority under sub-section (3) or rupees one thousand whichever is greater.
Section 44 of the Act empowers any authority appointed under Section 3(1) of
the Act that if he has reason to suspect that any dealer is attempting to evade tax or
that any person transporting goods or any other person has kept his accounts in such a
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 11
manner as is likely to cause evasion of tax payable under the Act, such authority may
for reasons to be recorded in writing, seize such accounts and registers or documents.
Power has also given to the authority appointed under Section 3(1) of the Act to enter
into and search any place of business of any dealer. The said section empowers the
authority under clause (b) of sub-section (5) of Section 44 of the Act to impose a
penalty equal to three times the amount of tax calculated on the value of such goods
and to release the goods as soon as the penalty is paid in case the dealer or the person
in-charge of the goods fails to produce any evidence or satisfy the said authority
regarding the proper accounting of the goods.
In the instant case, the officers of the Sales Tax Department made a surprise
visit to the premises and godowns of the respondent-Company and searched the
premises and godowns. On September 2, 1993, notices were issued to the appellant-
Company to produce the documents to satisfy the authority about the proper
accounting of the goods seized. The appellant challenged the legality of one of such
notices before the learned single Judge of the High Court by way of filing a Writ
Application (Civil Rule No. 2486 of 1983). The writ application was opposed by the
State of Assam. The learned single Judge allowed the writ application following the
decision of this Court in State of Haryana vs. Sant Lal (supra). The learned single
Judge was of the opinion that the provisions contained in Sections 42 and 44 of the Act
are prospective in nature and, therefore, on the basis thereof the authority appointed
under the Act had no jurisdiction to demand books of accounts prior to July 1,1993.
Aggrieved by the said order, the State of Assam preferred Writ Appeal No. 197
of 1996 before the Gauhati High Court and submitted that since the tax is levied under
the aforesaid Act and whatever is ancillary or subsidiary provision necessary for
achieving the object of such legislation would be covered by Entry 54 of List II of the
Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. It was further submitted that the entries
in the Legislative List should not be read in a narrow or pedantic sense, but must be
given their fullest meaning and widest amplitude and be held to be extending to all
ancillary and subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be
comprehended in them. The judgment in the case of Tripura Goods Transport
Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra) was also cited before
the learned Judges of the Division Bench. According to the learned counsel appearing
for the State of Assam, the said judgment squarely covers the controversy raised in the
present case. The learned Judges of the Division Bench, after perusing the relevant
provisions of the Act and two judgments namely, Tripura Goods Transport
Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra) and State of
Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr. (supra), was of the opinion that the case on hand
would be covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Tripura Goods Transport
Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra) in which case the
earlier decision of this Court rendered in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant
Lal & Anr. (supra) was duly considered.
In the result, the appeal filed by the State of Assam was allowed and the order
passed by the learned single Judge declaring Sections 42 and 44 of the Act as ultra
vires was set aside and the said provisions were held to be intra vires of the
Constitution of India.
The respondents, being aggrieved, preferred this appeal by way of special
leave petition.
We heard Mr. M.L. Lahoty, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.
Krishna Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State.
Mr. M.L. Lahoty, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the
judgment in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr. (supra) has
clearly laid down that in a valid State Legislation on sales tax, the scope/ambit of Entry
54, List II in the Seventh Schedule cannot be stretched to cover the persons who are
neither "dealer" nor have any nexus with the transaction of sale of goods. The
transporter/carrier being stranger to the transaction of sale or purchase, they cannot be
governed or regulated by a Sales Tax Legislation. He further submitted that the
Division Bench of the High Court, however, failed to appreciate that the facts and
circumstances as also the provisions of the Tripura Sales Tax Act and the Rules framed
thereunder were totally distinct and different and, therefore, despite affirming the ratio o
f
State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr.,(supra) this Court came to a different
conclusion while upholding the validity of the provisions of the Tripura Sales Tax Act
and Rules framed thereunder.
It was further submitted that this Court in the case of Tripura Goods Transport
Association & Anr., vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra) upheld the validity of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 11
the impugned provisions of the Tripura Sales Tax Act and the Rules framed thereunder
in spite of the judgment of this Court in State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal &
Anr.(supra) inasmuch as Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act which was
the subject matter of the examination before this Court in State of Haryana’s case had
expressly excluded transporters/carriers from the definition of the persons transporting
goods. The Division Bench erred in holding that the case of the State is covered by the
decision in Tripura Goods Transport Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of
Taxes & Ors. (supra) and thereby upholding the validity of Sections 42 and 44 of the
Assam General Sales Tax Act.
It was further submitted that the learned Judges of the Division Bench failed to
precisely compare the provisions of the Assam General Sales Tax, 1993, more
particularly, the definition of "dealer" under Section 2(10) and Section 42 of the Act as to
the obligations arising therefrom for furnishing documents and maintaining books of
accounts with the area expressly curved out by the Explanation II appended to Section
42 so far as the same relate to the transporter/carrier of goods as also the provisions of
Section 44 authorising the authority under Section 3(1) for carrying out the search and
seizure and thereafter levying penalty vide Section 44(5)(b) equal to three times the
amount of tax calculated on the value of the goods.
It was further argued that Explanation II appended to Section 38 of the Haryana
General Sales Tax Act is similarly worded and almost pari materia to Explanation II
appended to Section 42 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act and as such the ratio of
State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr. (supra) mutatis mutandis applies to the
present case.
Concluding his arguments, Mr. M.L. Lahoty submitted that the transporters like
the appellant-Company were not involved in any sale or purchase of any goods. They
only performed the job of transportation of goods in and outside the State of Assam
and, therefore, the State Legislature had no authority and jurisdiction to enact any law
in exercise of its powers conferred under Entry 54 of List II of Seventh Schedule to the
Constitution of India. As such, the provisions contained in Section 42 of the Act
imposing obligations on the transporters to furnish particulars and information and to
maintain accounts etc. were ultra vires. Arguing further, learned counsel submitted that
the Legislature also had no power to levy penalty on them. The transporters carrying
goods on behalf of dealers had no nexus with the sale of goods and that the appellant-
Company not being a dealer as per the provisions of the Act and the object of the Act
being to deal with taxes in respect of sales or purchases of goods in the State of
Assam, the provisions contained in Section 42 so far as the transporters were
concerned were contrary to the object and the restrictions imposed under the provisions
of Sections 42 of the Act so far as the transporters were concerned were unreasonable.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State supported the impugned
action of the respondents and submitted that the transportation being a part of the
business, can be termed as ancillary to the business and in that view of the matter, the
authority had jurisdiction to issue the notices \026 Annexure II.
On the above pleadings of the learned counsel appearing for the respective
parties, the following questions require consideration:
1) Whether the provisions of Assam General Sales Tax, 1993 are
similar to the provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax, 1973 or
they are similar to the provisions of Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976?
2) Whether the provisions contained in Section 42 requiring the
transporters to furnish to the prescribed authority true and complete
particulars and information and to maintain true and complete
accounts, registers and documents in respect thereof and provisions
contained in Section 44 empowering the appointed authority to search
any office, godown etc. of transporters and seize any goods found
therein can sustain in law.
3) If so, whether the authority can direct a transporter to comply with the
requirements of Section 42 for period prior to the enactment coming
into force.
We have given our thoughtful consideration for the submissions made by the
respective parties. We entirely agree with the judgment of the learned Judges of the
Division Bench of the Assam High Court for the conclusion arrived at by them and
reasons recorded in the judgment.
In the present case, the appellant has challenged the validity of Sections 42
and 44 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 along with the impugned
assessment contending that the transporters are not "dealers" within the meaning of the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 11
Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 and hence any obligation to maintain the
documents such as registers, cash memos, challans etc. as required under Section 44
of the Act could not be imposed upon them nor any provision imposing penalty and
punishment for non-compliance of the same could be made and the same is beyond
legislative competence. In our view, under Section 42 of the Act, it is an obligation on
every clearing, booking or forwarding agent or any other person transporting goods who
during the course of its business handles documents of titles to the goods for or on
behalf of any dealer or person holding certificates under Section 14 of the said Act to
furnish to the prescribed authority true and complete accounts, register, documents etc.
The said Section also provides for levy of penalty at the rate of three times of tax
calculated on the value of the goods in respect of which no particulars or information
have been furnished under Section 42(1) of the Act or no cash memo or challan has
been produced before the competent authority under Section 42(3) or Rs.1000/-
whichever is greater. The said Section empowers the appointed authority to enter and
search any place of business of any dealer if he has reason to believe that any dealer is
attempting to evade tax for that any person transporting goods for any other person
who has kept in accounts in such a manner as is likely to cause evasion of tax. As per
the accepted norms of taxation the jurisdiction whatever is ancillary or subsidiary
provision necessary for achieving the object of a tax statute is covered by Entry 54 of
List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. The Entries in the
Legislative List have a very wide meaning and scope and should have a broad
interpretation so as to make provisions in the Act workable and in the interest of the
revenue. The obligation imposed upon the transporters under Sections 42 and 44 of
the Act is also a part of such preventive measures against any evasion of taxes and the
same should not be read in a narrow sense.
In our view, the transporters are not strangers to the sale or purchase of goods,
to the contrary are parts and parcels and are directly involved in storing the goods
purchased or sold by, and in many cases such, transactions are fictitiously carried on in
false name and address besides false classifications vis-‘-vis transportation of such
goods in and outside of the State making themselves party to the episode of such
fictitious transactions for the sole purpose of evasion of tax by the dealers purchasing
and selling such goods.
The judgment of this Court in Tripura Goods Transport Association & anr.
Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra) was cited before us. In that judgment,
this court has specifically held such agents transporting goods to be reasonably and
proximately connected to the sale transaction and hence occasionally liable under the
Sales Tax Laws. It is pertinent to mention that this Court while considering the Tripura’s
case had taken into consideration the judgment by this Court in the case of State of
Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr. (supra). The present case, in our view, is fully
covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Tripura’s case.
In our opinion, there cannot be any irregularity to call for books of accounts,
documents, evidence etc. as the same is necessary for the tax authorities to make
proper verification and scrutiny of the genuineness of the transactions. Issuance of
notice for verification of a transaction is a formal step and the same is required for
proper verification and scrutiny of the genuineness of the transaction to safeguard the
interest of the State revenue.
We have carefully perused both the judgments. Both the judgment uphold the
legality of the charging and penal provisions in issue. But this Court struck down the
relevant provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 because of apparent
ambiguity inherent therein. However, in course of considering the analogous provision
viz Section 36 A and Section 38 B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976, this Court in the
case of Tripura goods Association & anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors
.(supra) held that maintenance of accounts by the transporters is only to help the taxing
authority to trace the dealer, fix the goods transported co-relating with the dealers
transporting such goods for fixing tax liability in this regard. This Court further held as
follows:
"If a clearing or forwarding agent or "dalal" or person
transporting goods is indeed reasonably and proximately connected
with the sale occasioning the liability to the sales tax, it is legitimate to
license himself under the Act and maintain and furnish such
information and particulars to the assessing authority thereunder as
he would in the course of his business come to possess, it is
legitimate then to make him liable for such escapement of tax as has
resulted from the breach by him of such obligation and to a
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 11
reasonable penalty."
Thus it is seen that Sections 42 and 44 of the Act do not impose any liability
upon the transporter, carriers etc. to pay any sales tax under the Act. The said sections
are basically meant to check the tax evasion. Thus the requirement of maintenance of
document and the certificate of registration by a transporter or any such agent is only for
similar purpose as incorporated under Sections 36 A and 38 B of the Tripura Sales Tax
Act, 1976 which has been held to be a valid piece of legislation by this Court in the case
of Tripura Goods Transport Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors.
(supra). In our view, the present case is fully covered by the said judgment of this
Court.
The judgment of this Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal
& Anr. (supra) has dealt in regard to Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act,
1973 which required the clearing or forwarding agent or any other person transporting
goods including manager, agent, driver or employee who within the State during the
course of his business, handles "documents of title to goods" for or on behalf of the
dealers to furnish the assessing authority the particulars and information in respect of
transaction of goods and further required to obtain a licence from the assessing
authority in breach whereof penalty was provided for. But this Court struck down
Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 primarily due to the reason that
the meaning of the words "document of title to goods" was held to be not clearly defined
and so it was found that provisions of the Act cannot have any application to those
persons who do not handle documents of title.
In our view, the Assam Act is completely distinguishable from the Haryana Act.
There is a marked difference between the provisions of Haryana and Tripura
Laws inasmuch as Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 do not
clearly define the person dealing with "documents of title of goods". Further, this Court
declared the provisions of Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Act to be ultra vires
primarily on the ground that the transporters/carriers were specifically excluded from the
definition of "person transporting goods" in the explanation appended to Section 38 of
the Act. For this ambiguity alone, this Court has struck down Section 38 of the Haryana
General Sales Tax Act. In the case of Tripura goods Transport Association & Anr.
Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra), this Court upheld the analogous
provisions contained under Section 36A and 38B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act as the
said provisions clearly defined the expression "dealer" and "documents of title to goods"
have been clearly defined and in that view, this Court upheld the legality of Section 36A
and Section 38B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act.
It is further seen that Explanation II to Section 42 of the Act excludes only
person in-charge of a rail head or a post office from the definition of "person transporting
goods". This Explanation clearly states that person in charge of a goods carrier carrying
such goods would be included in the definition of "person transporting goods". It is only
due to the reason, this Court was inclined to declare Sections 36 A and 38B of the
Haryana General Sales Tax Act as ultra vires and illegal.
The Assam Act, in all its spirit and content is analogous to the Tripura Sales Tax
Act and not similar to the Haryana General Sales Tax Act inasmuch as the Assam Act
clearly defines the expressions "document of title to goods" and there is no disparity
amongst such agents dealing with documents of title to goods. The argument of
learned counsel appearing for the appellant that Explanation II to Section 42 of the Act
was misinterpreted by the High Court holding the transporters to be dealers under the
Assam Act has no merits. The contention of the appellant’s counsel is based on
misconception that the expression "goods carrier" in the Assam Act is qualified by the
expression "other than" which qualifies the expression "a rail head or a post office". The
preposition of appearing before the expression "a goods carrier carrying such goods"
clearly shows that this expression is directly related to the words "person in-charge"
giving the meaning that person in-charge of a goods carrier carrying such goods is
included in the definition of "person transporting goods".
Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 required clearing or
forwarding agent, Dalal or any other person transporting goods (manager, agent, driver
or employee) within the State, who during the course of his business handles
documents of title to goods for or on behalf of any dealer to furnish to the assessing
authority the particulars and information in respect of the transactions of the goods and
further required to obtain licence from the assessing authority in breach whereof heavy
penalty was provided for, were held to be ultra vires and no proximate connection was
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 11
found to be existing between the transaction of sale and the clearing or forwarding
agent, dalal or other transporter. The penalty as provided was also held to be
disproportionate to the quantum of escaped assessment. It was also observed in the
case of State of Harayana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr. (Supra) that the legislative
entries have to be read in a wider sense so as to include all subsidiary and ancillary
matters. Provisions by which evasion of tax could be prevented and further providing
machinery for the purpose would be within the ambit of the legislative entry. It was
further observed that if a clearing or forwarding agent or dalal or a person transporting
the goods is indeed reasonably and proximately connected with the sale occasioning
the liability to the sales tax, it would be a legitimate requirement for such person to
obtain licence and maintain and furnish such information and particulars to the
assessing authority as in the course of his business he may come to possess. But
while commenting on sub-section (1) of Section 38 of the Haryana General Sales Tax
Act it was observed that it was not every clearing or forwarding agent or dalal or person
transporting goods who comes into possession of the particulars and information
required to be furnished. It was further observed that it is only such clearing or
forwarding agents or other persons transporting the goods who can be required to
obtain licence and would be liable to penalty for breach of such provisions. The
meaning of the words "documents of title to goods" was also held to be not clearly
defined. So it was found that provisions of the Act cannot have any application to those
persons who do not handle documents of title. Thus provisions of the Act cannot have
any application to all and the State Legislature will have no power to legislate in respect
of such persons. The matters which are not ancillary or subsidiary to the legislative
entry cannot be legislated upon under the entry.
The Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court while considering the impugned
judgment had taken into consideration both the judgments of this Court as cited above
and held that Sections 29, 36A and 38B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act are in substance
similar to Sections 42 and 44 of the Assam Sales Tax Act and uphold the provisions of
the Assam Act in consonance to the judgment of this Court in the case of Tripura
goods Tranport Association & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra). In
our opinion, there is no exclusion of any transporter/carrier from the definition of person
dealing in "documents of title to goods".
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the civil appeal deserves to
be dismissed. The Civil Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. However, there shall be no
order as to costs.
In Writ Petition No. 622 of 2000
As already noticed, the writ petition filed by M/s A.B.C. (India) Ltd. Was allowed
by the learned single Judge of the Gauhati High Court on 20.2.1996 following the ratio
laid down by this Court in the Case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Anr.
(supra) and declared Sections 42 and 44 of the Act to be ultra vires so far as they
related to the obligations of the transporters to furnish information and the power of
search and seizure in connection with the goods transported by the transporters. Writ
Appeal filed by the State of Assam was allowed. S.L.P.(C) No. 5937 of 2000 was
preferred before this Court challenging the said judgment. Leave was granted by this
court. The State of Assam, by taking advantage of the decision of the Division Bench
dated 4.1.2000, inserted Section 46A in the Act of 1993 by Assam Act XX of 1999
giving it the effect from 2.2.2000 and thereby made it statutory obligation of every
transporter, carrier or transporting agent engaged in transport business relating to
taxable goods in Assam to obtain a Certificate of Registration. The said Section 46A
reads as under:
"46A. For carrying out the purposes of Section 46 every
transporter, carrier or transporting agent, operating its transport
business relating to taxable goods in Assam, shall be required to
obtain a Certificate of Registration in the prescribed manner from the
Commissioner or any officer appointed under Section 3 to assist him,
on payment of such fees as may be prescribed."
By exercising power under Section 72(1) of the Act, consequential amendments
were also made in the Assam General Sales Tax Rules, 1993 by issuing the Notification
on 11.9.2000. A new Rule 21A was inserted stipulating that every transporter, carrier or
transporting agent liable for registration under Section 46A within 60 days of
commencement of the amending Rules was to submit application for registration. Yet
another new Rule i.e. Rule 39A was inserted providing for an appeal to the Assam
Board of Revenue. Rules 42 and 43 were also inserted to provide for setting up of
check post and for the service of notice. The above writ petition was filed by the Assam
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 11
Chamber of Inter-State Carriers challenging both the Amending Acts that is, Assam Act
XX of 1999 by which Section 46A was inserted as also the Amendment Rules 2000 as
the same are repugnant to Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of
India as the State of Assam lacks legislative competency to legislate the said provisions
of law.
It was submitted by the petitioners that the transporters/carriers are neither
dealers under the Assam General Sales Tax Act nor they in any way even remotely
concerned/associated with the transaction of sale/purchase of any taxable goods.
Furthermore, it does not handle the documents of title of goods and accordingly no
liability arising out of the Assam General Sales Tax Act and the Rules framed
thereunder can be fastened on any of the transporters, carriers which are members of
the writ petitioners’ Association. It was submitted that as the entire controversy arising
out of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court dated 4.1.2000 was
under consideration by this Court, the petitioners sought to file the above writ petition
under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of the Act and the
Rules framed thereunder.
This Court issued Rule Nisi and tag this petition along with Civil appeal No. 2760
of 2000 @ S.L.P.(C) No. 5937 of 2000.
A counter affidavit was filed by the State of Assam contending that Section 46
A of the Act requires that every transporter/carrier or a transporting agent operating its
transport business relating to taxable goods in Assam is to obtain a certificate of
registration from the Commissioner or any Officer appointed under Section 3 of the Act
to assist him, on payment of a prescribed fee.
We have perused Section 46 A which, in our view, has been inserted only for
achieving the objective of sealing loopholes of avoidance and evasion of sales tax by
the fictitious dealers with the help of transport companies. Normally the transporters are
not liable to pay tax but liability of the transport arises only if the transporter or carri
er
does not disclose the particulars required under Section 46A of the said Act read with
Rule 21A of the Rules thereunder. The newly inserted Section 46 A of the Act, in our
view, is legally sound and analogous to Section 38 B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976.
It is also pertinent to mention that Section 38 B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 has
been upheld by this Court in the case of Tripura Goods Transport Association & anr. Vs.
Commissioner of Taxes & Ors. (supra).
In our view, the obligation imposed upon the transporters under Sections 42 and
44 and 46A of the Assam Act is also a part of such preventive measures against any
evasion of taxes and the same should not be read in a narrow sense. Section 46 A and
Rule 21 A of the Assam Act and the Rules framed thereunder respectively are valid and
piece of legislation for the purpose of checking evasion of taxes by making the
transporters/carriers accountable for the part they play in the transaction of sale and
purchase of goods.
Thus we hold that the insertion of Section 46A and Rule 21A have in no way
infringed the fundamental rights of the petitioners as the inserted provisions are
analogous to those of Section 38 B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 which have
since been upheld by this Court. The State Legislature has the jurisdiction and
competence under Entry 53 of List II of the VII Schedule to the Constitution of India to
legislate such provisions as contained in Section 46 A of the Act, 1993.
In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, the writ petition
deserved to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.