Tirupur Exporters Association vs State of Tamil Nadu and others

Shivaraj Patil, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), for the respondents.

The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash condition No. 3 stipulated for direct export and export

through merchant exporters and exporters which is not stipulated either u/s 40(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act or rule 35-A(1)(III)

(A) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules.

Mr. Ramani, the learned counsel for the petitioner, drew my attention to rule 35-A of the said Rules. Rule 35-A(1)(III)(A) so far as it is relevant

for the purpose of this case, reads thus :

35-A(1). When the goods are moved for export or are transported after clearance from a seaport, the clearing or forwarding agent, as the case

may be, notwithstanding that such agent is not a dealer registered under the Act or any other person in-charge of the goods vehicle or boat, who,

on behalf of such agent transports the goods, shall carry with him the following documents in respect of the goods carried in the goods vehicle or

boat, namely :

I and II..........

III. (A) In the case of goods moved for export,

(a) if the purchases are made in the State, -

(i) Sale invoice; and

(ii) Letter from the exporter specifying the name of the port of export, the name of the ship and its probable dates of arrival and departure from the

port..........

On the basis of the rule extracted above, he submitted that the additional condition imposed in the circular dated February 17, 1995 that the

petitioner should produce copy of the foreign buyer''s purchase order is invalid and is also without authority of law, and it is beyond what is

expected under the rule extracted above.

The learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, submitted that such a circular was issued as the petitioner

sought certain relaxation and persons like petitioner and others similarly placed offered to produce foreign buyer''s purchase orders. Under those

circumstances, the circular was issued. If the petitioner feels that the condition of producing copy of the foreign buyer''s purchase order is

unwarranted and results in inconvenience or hardship to the petitioner, let the petitioner comply with the rule in its entirety, and the additional

condition shall not be insisted. She added that if the petitioner complies with the rule abovementioned, the respondents shall not go by the circular

dated February 17, 1995 and they will deal with the case according to the rule itself.

In this view, I proceed to pass the following Order :

In view of what is stated above, it is made clear that the petitioner shall go by the rule and the authorities also will go according to the Rule without

looking into the contents of the circular. The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Writ petition ordered accordingly.