- (1.) The revenue has filed the writ petition being aggrieved against the order of the Tribunal in Appeal No.282/96 dated 30.07.2002 relating to the assessment year 1992-93, by which the Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by holding that the transactions involved are consignment sales.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows:- (i) An order of assessment was passed by the Assessing Officer dated 27.01.1995 disallowing the turnover for a sum of Rs.98,53,396/- by treating the same as interstate sale. The Assessing Officer has passed the said order on the ground that for about four transactions, the assessee has received the same amount mentioned in the sale invoice. The Assessing Officer further held that the documents required under Rule 4(3)(a) of the CST (TN) Rules have not been produced. The further ground on which the Assessing Officer has rejected the case of the assessee is that the agreement entered into between the assessee and the agentS does not contain a clause for the return of the goods. (ii) Having aggrieved against the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Coimbatore in appeal No.CST 26/95. The first appellate authority in and by his order dated 10.05.1996 has rejected the appeal filed by the assessee on the very same grounds upon which the Assessing Officer has disallowed the exemption sought for by the assessee. (iii) The assessee filed a further appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal in Appeal No.282/96 dated 30.07.2002 has allowed the appeal by holding that the records would clearly prove that the assessee has sent the goods to the other state agents and commissions have been paid. It was further held that the agents in the other States have paid the local sales tax in the other State. The Tribunal also held that Rule 4(3)(a) of the CST (TN) Rules are not mandatory and a mere fact that the assessee has received the amount mentioned in the sale invoice by itself cannot be a ground to hold that the transactions are interstate sales. The Tribunal has also held that the mere fact that the agreement does not contain a clause to the effect about the return of the unsold goods by itself cannot be a ground to hold that the transactions are not consignment sales. (iv) Aggrieved against that order of the Tribunal, the revenue has come up with the present writ petition.
(3.) We have heard the argument of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.;