Disposed

S L N S Enterprises v. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Aug 2020WP/7457/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Division Bench disposed of a writ petition challenging the refusal to grant export sales exemption for granite trading. The Court directed the 1st respondent to reconsider the petitioner's representation dated 17.04.2018 regarding Form H declarations under Rule 12(7), provided the original form is enclosed.

What did the court decide?

Directed 1st respondent to consider the representation dated 17.04.2018 regarding Form H declaration, provided the original form is enclosed, and pass orders in accordance with law.

S L N S Enterprises Vs The Assistant… — GST and Indirect Tax | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶3

W.P. No. 7457 of 2020

¶4

ORDER :( Per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar)

¶5

The present Writ Petition came to be filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the representation of the petitioner, dated 17.04.2018, relating to claim of export sales exemption on the strength of Form ‘H’ in terms of Rule 12(7) of CST (R&T) Rules, for the year 2013-14, and insisting for payment of the disputed demand, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law.

¶6

1. The facts, in issue, are that:

¶7

(i) The petitioner is a registered dealer on the rolls of 1^st respondent herein doing business in granite trading and export. For the assessment year 2013-14, the petitioner herein filed monthly returns under the Central Sales Tax Act 1956 [‘ CST Act ’] reporting gross turnover of Rs.42,35,000/- and claimed exemption on the entire turnover as the same relates to sales in the course of export outside India, which are exempt from tax under Section 5(3) of the CST Act. Assessment Order, dated 28.02.2018, came to be passed by the 1^st respondent treating it as inter-state sale of granite not covered

¶8

¶9

under any statutory declaration. Further, the claim was rejected on the ground that ‘H’ Forms were not filed.

¶10

(ii) It is said that, immediately after receipt of communication, the petitioner approached 1^st respondent and requested time to produce ‘H’ Forms as there was some delay in receiving those documents by the exporters. It is said that, the petitioner could not secure the declarations for the aforesaid reason, and, as such, made a representation, dated 17.04.2018, which was acknowledged by the 1^st respondent, on 18.04.2018, along with the export documents, requesting for grant of necessary relief by re-assessing the assessment order. While so, a notice, dated 03.02.2020, came to be issued demanding payment of Rs.6,14,075/- towards arrears for the year 2013-14. From the above, it appears that, ‘H’ Forms declaration was totally ignored, in-spite of enclosing along with the representation, dated 17.04.2018.

¶11

(iii) It is urged that, the 1^st respondent has power to consider the declarations even after the assessment order in terms of Rule 12(7) of CST (R&T). He placed on record various judgments of this court and also of other courts in support of his plea.

¶12

¶13

Though no counter is filed, but, Sri. Vivekanand, the learned Government Pleader, opposed the same contending that the question of re-opening the assessment does not arise, once it has been finalized. He submits that the judgment relied upon by the petitioner may not apply to the case on hand.

¶14

As seen from the record, in W.P. No. 21316 of 2019, dated 31.12.2019, a Division Bench of this High Court while relying upon a judgment of another Division Bench of the combined High Court in W.P. No. 38006 of 2016 directed the authorities to receive the subject form and consider the same in accordance with law, within a period of one month on its production.

¶15

Similarly, in W.P. No. 20160 of 2019 a Division Bench of this Court, on 20.12.2019, following the earlier Judgment of the Division Bench in W.P. No. 38006 of 2016, allowed the writ petition in terms thereof.

¶16

A perusal of the Order in W.P. No. 38006 of 2016 would show that, in the said case, the 1^st respondent passed an assessment order for the year 2011-12 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The assessment was complete since the petitioner could not produce “F” Forms. A representation came to be made along with “F” Forms, but, the authority therein refused to accept the same. The only argument advanced before this court was that, “F” Forms was received

¶17

¶18

belatedly from their counterpart in West Bengal and the matter requires sympathetic consideration. Accepting the request made, the Court allowed the writ petition setting aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to 1^st respondent for a fresh consideration for “F” Forms produced by the petitioner.

¶19

Similarly, in W.P. No. 14638 of 2019, dated 13.10.2019, to which one of us [CPK, J] was a party, while dealing with the non-submission of “C” Forms and “H” Forms declarations along with the returns and submission of the same after the assessment order, allowed the writ petition directing the authorities to reopen the assessment and pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the “C” Forms and “H” Forms declarations.

¶20

Similarly, in Godrej Agrovet Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, Eluru [(2007) 007 VST 0730], the Court directed the petitioner to produce “C” forms within a period of three weeks, which shall be received by the authority for its consideration to decide as to whether the petitioner had shown any sufficient cause for the belated filing of the “C” forms and appropriate further orders shall be passed in accordance with law.

¶21

Having regard to the judgments referred to above, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms thereof directing 1^st respondent to consider the representation, dated 17.4.2018,

¶22

¶23

relating to the claim of export sales exempt on the strength of Form ‘H’ in terms of Rule 12(7) of CST (R&T) Rules provided the original Form ‘H’ is enclosed along with the representation and then, pass orders in accordance with law.

¶24