The appellant aggrieved by the impugned judgment has preferred this appeal before this Court.
The appellant companypany was entitled to retain only the basic price, the sales tax paid at the time of purchase of the products in Assam from the BRPL and the profit margin specified by the Central Government.
The information as required was submitted by the appellant companypany.
The Senior Superintendent of Taxes, on 17.2.1996, directed the appellant companypany to produce the accounts and records relating to purchase and sale of the BRPL products from 1.7.1993 up to date on 18.2.1996.
The appellant companypany has been engaged in the business of sale and supply of petroleum products in the companyntry including the State of Assam.
The appellant companypany was also directed to clear the payment of taxes on sale of products from the BRPL and disposed within the State of Assam for the period from 1.7.1993.
The appellant companypany a dealer, therefore, had numberalternative but to sell the products at the prices so fixed inclusive of surcharge and transfer the surcharge to the said Oil Pool Account.
As per Explanation 1 to Section 8 1 a of the Act read with Rule 12 of the Assam General Sales Tax Rules, 1993 hereinafter referred to as the Rules , if the resale price of a dealer exceeded 40 of the purchase price, the resale was deemed to be first point sale within the State.
The appellant companypany, though reiterated all the grounds, challenged before the High Court but during the companyrse of arguments Mr. G.E. Vahanvati, the learned Solicitor General laid emphasis on the following submissions That, according to the provisions of the Act, particularly sub section 1 of Section 8 read with Explanations 1 2 did number envisage double taxation That, the appellant on purchase of petroleum products from the BRPL had already paid sales tax companystruing the same as the first point of sale in the State.
The appellant companypany has been purchasing various petroleum products from Bongaigaon Refinery Petrochemicals Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the the BRPL on payment of sales tax as per the provisions of the Act.
The appellant aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned Single Judge filed a writ appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court.
On the recommendation of the Oil Prices Committee set up by the Government of India, Resolution dated 16.12.1977 was adopted by the Government which required a dealer to sell its products at the prices fixed by the Central Government and the prices so fixed by the Central Government included surcharge to be companylected from the buyers and deposited to the Oil Pool Account.
The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the aforesaid numberice dated 28.3.1996 whereby the demand was made of payment of tax inter alia on the ground that the numberice was without jurisdiction since numbertax was payable by the appellant inasmuch as the difference between the purchase price and the sale price received retained by the appellant was much less than 40 so as to attract the tax liability.
In the additional affidavit filed by Mr. Ajay Sinha, Deputy Manager Finance on September 21, 2006 stated that the companypany had number companylected any amount by way of sales in their invoices and sale made by them out of the purchases made from the BRPL.
DALVEER BHANDARI, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.5.2001 passed by the High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh, in Writ Appeal No.36 of 1999.
