Natesan Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that exemption to sale of Gloriosa Superba under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax [TNVAT] will be available to interstate transaction in absence of specific notification issued under section 8(5) of CST Act.
Facts- The challenge to the Impugned Revision Order is primarily on the ground that the petitioner is engaged in sale of Gloriosa Superba and that the item in question was exempted under Notification No. II(1)/CTR/30(a-2)/2007 (TNGG Extraordinary/March 23, 2007 [G.O.Ms.No.79, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B2) Department] dated 23.03.2007 and therefore the Impugned Demand confirmed by the respondent was unjustified and is therefore liable to be interfered with.
Conclusion- Held that as per Sub-Section (5) to Section 8 of the CST Act, the State Government has to issue a notification which should specify the conditions. In this case, no notification has been issued under Sub-Section (5) to Section 8 of the CST Act which has been brought to the attention of the Court. Unless a specific notification has been issued under Sub-Section (5) to Section 8 of the CST Act, only General Notification issued under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax (TNVAT) Act, 2006 will apply to the interstate transactions by applying Sub-Section (2) to Section 8 of the CST Act. Since there is no notification issued under Section 8(5) of the CST Act, the conditions of Section 8(5) of the CST Act will not apply to the facts of the case. Therefore, the demand proposed and confirmed in the Impugned Revision Order 22.04.2022 is liable to be interfered with. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No.II(1)/CTR/30(a-2)/2007 (TNGG Extraordinary/March 23, 2007 [G.O.Ms.No.79, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B2) Department] dated 23.03.2007 with consequential relief.
