Case: Tripura Goods Tpt. Asson.  Vs. Commr. Of Taxes

on which is doing the business of transporting goods within the outside the State of Tripura, is aggrieved by the judgment of the Gauhati High Court dismissing the writ Appeal challenging the constitutional validity of the Tripura Sales Tax [11th Amendment] Rules, 1994, (for short `the Rules) and Sections 29, 32and 36A of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976, (for short `the Act) including notifications dated 23rd September, 1994 and 15th October, 1994. By means of the aforesaid 11th Amendment,(3) has been inserted after(2) of Ruleof the Tripura Sales Tax Rules, 1976, (for short `Principal rules),(1A) has been inserted afterule (2) in Rule 63A has been substituted in place of old(2) of the principal Rules and Rules 64A has been substituted for the old64A. The resultant effect of such amendment is that the appellants, who are working as Transporters in Tripura, are required to obtain a Certificate of Registration and to comply with various other formalities as prescribed under the Act and the Rules, viz., to maintain accounts according to the prescription made by the respondents under Section 36A of the Act for carrying on transport business while entering into or going outside the State of Tripura including making the declaration in Form XXIV, which is challenged to be beyond the legislative competence of the State Legislature and ultra vires the Constitution offending Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 246, 265, 286, 300A and 301 of the Constitution of India. The challenge is based on the ground that the appellants are Transporters and are not dealers within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the said Act, hence obligation cast on them under the Act and Rules are beyond the legislative competence of the State legislature.By a reasoned order, the learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ petition of the appellants, except the challenge to the validity of Rule 63A(2) of the principal Rules. However, the challenge made by the appellants regarding constitutional validity of Section 36A, which requires a carrier to maintain proper accounts of goods transported to or outside Tripura in the manner prescribed, was not entertained by the learned Single Judge. In appeal before the Division Bench though foundation was laid but specific prayer for declaration of Section 36A as ultra vires was not made due to inadvertence, hence the appellants sought amendment to the prayer at the appellate stage which was granted, accordingly it was incorporated at the appellate stage. The Division Bench also dismissed the appeal of the appellants. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.

Court's reasoning:
This itself clearly indicates when the liability of the offence punishable under Section 29 or Section 30 would be drawn. It only arises when such transporter deliberately makes false declaration and not when such declaration is true to his knowledge and belief. Learned senior counsel for the respondents fairly stated that the purpose mainly is to get the disclosure of the name and address etc. of the consignor and consignee. The rest of the columns from 7 to 13 are primarily to be filled in on the basis of the information given by the consignor. Every taxing statute has charging sections. It lays down the procedure to assess tax and penalties etc. It also provides provisions to cover pilferage of such revenue by providing such mechanism as it deem fit, in other words, to check evasion of tax and in doing so if any obligation is cast on any person having connections with consignor or consignee in relation to such goods, may be other than a dealer, to perform such obligation in aid, to check evasion and in case he is made liable for any offence, for his dereliction of duty or deliberate false act contrary to what he is obligated to do. In our opinion, it cannot be construed to be beyond the competence of State Legislature. The impugned provisions are not charging Sections, no tax liability is placed on the transporters. We find neither Sections 29, 30, 32 and 36A nor Rules 46A, 63A and 64A lack any legislative competence. They are within the legislative competence of the State and would fall under List II of Entry 54 of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India.