Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Defect In Served Copy Of Affidavit Not Fatal: Supreme Court Restores Election Petition Challenging Lok Sabha Poll Result, Clarifies Law On Form-25 Attestation

Supreme Court Holds Rule 3A(2) of Tripura Sales Tax Rules Valid, Allows Tax Deduction at Source

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has upheld the validity of Rule 3A(2) of the Tripura Sales Tax Rules, 1976, allowing for tax deduction at source (TDS) on the transfer of the right to use goods. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, declared that the rule is not ultra vires the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976. The court emphasized that Rule 3A(2) serves as a recovery mechanism and does not alter the liability or chargeability of tax. The ruling overturns the previous decision of the High Court, which had held the provision as ultra vires and quashed the memorandum requiring TDS.

The court clarified the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Tripura Sales Tax Act. It stated that every transfer of the right to use goods, including vehicles, is deemed to be a sale under the Act. Therefore, the liability to pay tax at a rate of 4% on such transfers rests with the transferor, who can be considered a dealer under the Act. The court rejected the argument put forth by the suppliers that they were not registered with the Tripura Sales Tax Act and thus not liable to pay tax.

Regarding the challenge to Rule 3A(2), the court noted that the rule was framed under Section 44 of the Act, which provides the rule-making power. It opined that the rule falls within the scope of the Act and does not exceed the legislative authority. Rule 3A(2) serves as a mechanism for recovery of tax from the buyer, who deducts and deposits the tax with the revenue authorities. The court held that the provision does not alter the chargeability or liability to pay tax, and thus, the High Court erred in declaring it ultra vires.

Justice M.R. Shah, delivering the judgment, stated, "Rule 3A(2) is not ultra vires the Tripura Sales Tax Act. It is a recovery mechanism and does not change the chargeability or liability to pay tax. The provision for tax deduction at source does not go beyond the provisions of the Act and Rules." The court further emphasized that Rule 3A(2) merely establishes the procedure for recovering the tax payable by the transferor/supplier from the buyer.

It affirms the legal validity of tax deduction at source on the transfer of the right to use goods, providing clarity and ensuring the proper collection of taxes. The decision brings certainty and upholds the legislative intent behind the Tripura Sales Tax Act.

Date of Decision: March 24, 2023

THE STATE OF TRIPURA & ANR. VS CHANDAN DEB & ORS.

Latest Legal News