Hindustan Metal Industries vs Commercial Tax Officer and Others

P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.—The petitioner assails the notice issued by the first respondent demanding payment of arrears of tax of Rs. 10,07,054 for the assessment years 1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-90.

It is the case of the petitioner that it had supplied goods (cast iron castings, etc.) to the Panchayat Raj and the Public Health Departments and the Executive Engineer concerned deducted the tax at source and issued the certificates of tax deduction giving the particulars of the invoices and the amount deducted. It is also the case of the petitioner that it had produced such certificates before the assessing authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the tax deduction at source is taken into account, there will be no arrears at all.

It is the contention of the learned Government Pleader that no particulars of remittances of tax by the departments concerned have been furnished and even the designation of the officer to whom the tax was remitted has not been furnished ; it is therefore not possible to give credit to the petitioner on the basis of the certificates furnished by it. To the same effect is the counter filed by the Commercial Tax Officer.

Dealing with an identical situation, a Division Bench of this Court held in Balaji Industrial and Agricultural Castings Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and Others, , that the obligation of the dealer was only to file the certificates issued by the Departments concerned as proof of deduction of tax at source and the dealer is not required to pursue the matter further by getting the particulars from the departments concerned with regard to the remittance of tax by those departments to the Commercial Tax Department. The circular issued by the Government on September 12, 1989 was, inter alia, relied upon by the Division Bench. The writ petition was allowed with a direction to give credit to the petitioners for the amounts mentioned in the tax deduction certificates and give necessary adjustment against the tax arrears. The case on hand is no different A similar objection as that raised by the learned Government Pleader was repelled by the Division Bench.

Therefore, following the said judgment, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the first respondent-assessing officer should provisionally give credit to the extent of the amounts covered by tax deduction certificates issued by the Panchayat Raj and the Public Health Departments concerned for the assessment years 1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-90. It is open to the first respondent to cause verification to be made with the concerned official of the departments as to the particulars of remittances. In case the first respondent wants necessary information, the concerned officer who issued the certificates or the successor in office is bound to furnish the necessary particulars. In case they fail to furnish the particulars to the Commercial Tax Officer, they should note that they will be exposed to the risk of being charged under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act. After such verification, if there is any deficit, it is open to the first respondent to demand the balance from the petitioner.

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.