M/S. Sm Exports vs The Commercial Tax Officer,
2024 Latest Caselaw 8270 AP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 8270 AP
Judgement Date : 11 September, 2024

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

M/S. Sm Exports vs The Commercial Tax Officer, on 11 September, 2024

Author: R Raghunandan Rao

Bench: R Raghunandan Rao

APHC010275782020
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                 AT AMARAVATI                 [3488]
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

            WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
                TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                               PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

               THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

WRIT PETITION Nos: 18205, 16220, 16395, 16401, 16506 & 19835 of 2020

W.P.No.18205 of 2020

Between:

M/s. Sm Exports                                       ...PETITIONER

                                 AND

The Commercial Tax Officer and Others             ...RESPONDENT(S)

W.P.No: 16220 of 2020

Between:

M/s. Rp Amma Traders                                  ...PETITIONER

                                 AND

The Commercial Tax Officer and Others             ...RESPONDENT(S)

W.P.No: 16395 of 2020

Between:

M/s. Rp Amma Traders Near Poleramma Temple,           ...PETITIONER

                                 AND

The Commercial Tax Officer and Others             ...RESPONDENT(S)

                                                                    RRR, J & HN, J
                                                     W.P.No.18205 of 2020 & batch



Between:

M/s.r.p.amma Traders,                                          ...PETITIONER

                                     AND

The Commercial Tax Officer and Others                    ...RESPONDENT(S)



Between:

M/s Rp Amma Traders                                            ...PETITIONER

                                     AND

The Commercial Tax Officer and Others                    ...RESPONDENT(S)



Between:

M/s. Sm Exports                                                ...PETITIONER

                                     AND

The Commercial Tax Officer and Others                    ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

   1. PEDDIBHOTLA VENKATA SAI RAJESH

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

   1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following common order:

(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)

As the issues raised in these Writ Petitions are common, they are being

disposed of, by way of this common order.

RRR, J & HN, J W.P.No.18205 of 2020 & batch

2. The petitioners, in all these cases, are persons who have

exported goods or were the penultimate sellers of goods in the course of

export under Section 5 (3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (herein referred

to as "the CST Act").

3. The petitioners would be entitled to exemption from payment of

tax, if they are able to demonstrate that they were the penultimate sellers in

the course of export, under Section 5 (3) of the CST Act. For this purpose, the

petitioners are entitled to file H Forms, prescribed under the Rules, to

demonstrate that they were the penultimate sellers. These H Forms are to be

filed before the assessment proceedings are completed. However, in all these

cases, the petitioners were unable to produce the H Forms before the

assessment proceedings had been completed as their purchasers had not

furnished the H Forms to them in time.

4. The assessing officers had refused to receive these H Forms

subsequently. Aggrieved by such refusal, the petitioners have approached this

Court, for relief, by way of the present set of Writ Petitions.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon a Judgment of

the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of M/s.Godrej

Agrovet Ltd., China Pothapally & another Vs. Commercial Tax Officer,

Eluru & another1, to contend that the relief given by the said Division Bench,

[2007] 007 VST 0730

RRR, J & HN, J W.P.No.18205 of 2020 & batch

for filing of C Forms, even after assessment, should be extended to H Forms

also.

6. The Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax would

submit that the concession granted by the Division Bench in the aforesaid

cited judgment is restricted to C Forms and the principle set out therein cannot

be extended to H Forms.

7. In the case of M/s.Godrej Agrovet Ltd., China Pothapally &

another Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Eluru & another, the issue before the

High Court was whether C Forms could be produced before the assessing

authority even after the assessment proceedings had been completed and

whether such C Forms could be taken into account by the assessing

authorities for determination of liability even after the said liability had already

been assessed under the formal assessment order. The Division Bench of the

erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, after considering the provisions of

the CST Act as well as Rule 12 of the Central Sales Tax (RNT) Rules (herein

referred to as "the Rules"), had held that Rule 12 itself provides for such

submission of C Forms even after the assessment had been completed.

However, the Division Bench had also placed a caveat that it would still be

open to the assessing authorities to ascertain whether such sufficient cause is

shown for the delay in filing of such Forms.

RRR, J & HN, J W.P.No.18205 of 2020 & batch

8. A perusal of the Rules, would show that Rule 12 (1) deals with C

Forms and D Forms, while Rule 12 (10) deals with H Forms. Rule 12 (10) (B)

of the Rules reads as follows:

7[(b) The provisions of the rules framed by the respective State Government under sub-sections (3), (4) and (5) of section 13 relating to the authority from whom and the conditions subject to which any form of certificate in Form 'H' may be obtained, the manner in which such form shall be kept in custody and records relating thereto maintained and the manner in which any such forms may be used and any such certificate may be furnished in so far as they apply to declaration in Form 'C' prescribed under these rules shall mutatis mutandis apply to certificate in Form 'H'.]

9. As this sub-rule specifies that the rules applicable to C Forms

shall be applicable mutatis mutandis to H Forms, the principle set out in

M/s.Godrej Agrovet Ltd., China Pothapally & another Vs. Commercial

Tax Officer, Eluru & another would be applicable in cases of late filing of H

Forms also.

10. It would also be necessary to mention that these Rules do not

provide for an absolute right in the dealers to file the Forms at any stage. This

Rule only permits such filing where the assessing authority is satisfied that

sufficient cause that has been shown for non-filing of the Forms within the

time stipulated under the Act and the Rules.

RRR, J & HN, J W.P.No.18205 of 2020 & batch

11. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, directing the