POCSO Presumption Is Not a Dead Letter, But ‘Sterling Witness’ Test Still Governs Conviction: Bombay High Court High Courts Cannot Routinely Entertain Contempt Petitions Beyond One Year: Madras High Court Declines Contempt Plea Filed After Four Years Courts Cannot Reject Suit by Weighing Evidence at Threshold: Delhi High Court Restores Discrimination Suit by Indian Staff Against Italian Embassy Improvised Testimonies and Dubious Recovery Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Allahabad High Court Acquits Two In Murder Case Sale with Repurchase Condition is Not a Mortgage: Bombay High Court Reverses Redemption Decree After 27-Year Delay Second Transfer Application on Same Grounds is Not Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court Clarifies Legal Position under Section 24 CPC Partnership Act | Eviction Suit by Unregistered Firm Maintainable if Based on Statutory Right: Madhya Pradesh High Court Violation of Income Tax Law Doesn’t Void Cheque Bounce Offence: Supreme Court Overrules Kerala HC, Says Section 138 NI Act Stands Independent Overstaying Licensee Cannot Evade Double Damages by Legal Technicalities: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Is Not a Stamp of Truth: Punjab & Haryana High Court Trademark Law Must Protect Reputation, Not Reward Delay Tactics: Bombay High Court Grants Injunction to FedEx Against Dishonest Use of Its Well-Known Mark Commercial Dispute Need Not Wait for a Written Contract: Delhi High Court Upholds Rs.6 Lakh Decree in Rent Recovery Suit Against Storage Defaulter Limitation Begins From Refusal, Not Date of Agreement—Especially When Title Was Under Litigation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sale by Karta of Ancestral Property Without Legal Necessity Is Voidable, Not Void: Madras High Court Dismisses Sons’ Appeal Demand for Gold at 'Chhoochhak' Ceremony Not Dowry – Demand Must Connected With Marriage: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claims Cannot Be Decided on Sympathy – Involvement of Offending Vehicle Must Be Proved: Supreme Court Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Ladder for Career Advancement – It Ends Once Exercised: Supreme Court

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