Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) THESE two appeals have been filed under section 20 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short, "the Act"). They relate to assessment year 2003 -04. It has been stated by the parties that an appeal (Appeal No. PNP -65/CST/2007 -08) was filed against order of assessment dated March 16, 2007 passed by the Excise and Taxation Officer, Ambala, for assessment year 2003 -04. By order dated August 6, 2007 of the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (A), Rohtak, the case was remanded to the assessing officer. The fresh assessment in terms of the said order was done by order dated November 23, 2007. The said order was challenged in Appeal No. PNP -128/CST/2007 -08. By order dated March 24, 2009, the appeal was held to be not maintainable and dismissed. Both the orders dated November 23, 2007 and March 24, 2009 were challenged before the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh.
(2.) SAID appeals were filed under section 9(2) of the Act and section 33 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ("the State Act"). The appeals were heard by three -Member Bench including the Chairman. By separate judgments the appeals were disposed of. The majority judgment by order dated February 8, 2012 was passed by the Chairman, Shri K.S. Bhoria and Mr. Subhash Kaushik (Member) and the minority view was expressed by Member Mr. Yudhavir Singh. So far as the branch transfer of MS, HSD and SKO was concerned according the minority view the matter was required to be remanded to the assessing officer in view of certain observations and conclusions arrived at by the learned Member. The remand was made in respect of branch transfer of MS, HSD and SKO supplied to dealer and bulk consumers in H.P. The majority did not concur with the view.
(3.) SO far as the branch transfer of ATF supplies to the army at various locations and North India is concerned, minority view was that levy of Central sales tax on Rs. 1,06,58,91,522 comprising value of fuel transferred from Ambala terminal to BPIs is manifestly bad in law and was set aside. By the majority view it was held that the levy was correct and appeal was accordingly dismissed.;