M/S. OMIL- JSC – JV vs. Union of India, [2013] 61 VST 370 (Gauhati),

FACTS
The petitioner filed writ petition under article 226 of The constitution of India praying for issue of an appropriate writ directing the respondent, North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (in short NEEPCO) to issue declaration form C under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 to the Petitioner who had executed works allotted by NEEPCO. The respondent had objected to issue C forms on the ground that there is no provision in the agreement for issue of C forms.

HELD
The issue is with regard to issue of declaration form ‘C’ by the respondent – NEEPCO to the Petitioner for availing concessional rate of tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, which is a statutory exaction and not the breach of any of the terms of the contract. Therefore, the jurisdiction of the Writ Court is not barred in taking up matters of taxation and liabilities under taxation statutes and cannot refuse to interfere on the ground that the question raised arises out of contractual agreement and is one of enforcement of contractual obligation and the same should be referred to arbitration. The Writ Court, under such circumstances, cannot deny a party of its right to have the issue decided by Writ Court. On perusal of rule 12 of the CST (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1956, it becomes clear that the purchaser of the goods shall issue C form to the seller and that obligation is a statutory exaction of the CST Act and other specific provisions made in this behalf in regard to obtaining of the declaration form C and issue of duplicate, etc. There is no scope of defeating the intention of the Legislature stated in its provision at the sweet will and pleasure of the purchaser of goods. There is also no scope for denying the benefit available to a selling dealer as introduced by the Legislature upon the refusal of the purchaser to issue C form and it is made clear by providing under sub rule (3) of rule 12 that in case the original form issued by the purchasing dealer is lost, the selling dealer can demand from the purchasing dealer to issue a duplicate form. This necessarily implies that there exist an obligation to issue C forms by the purchasing dealer. Merely because, the contract agreement does not stipulate issue of C forms, it cannot refuse to issue the form to the petitioner who is entitled to the benefit u/s. 8 (1) of the Act only upon production of such forms. Moreover, the High Court found that the respondent NEEPCO through its correspondence to the petitioner, even prior to awarding the contract work, requested to avail of concessional rates of taxes, gave assurance to the petitioner time and again to issue C forms and even communicated to the Commissioner of Sales Tax, West Bengal. It cannot be allowed to deny the same and reject the claim of the Petitioner on the pretext of absence of any provision in the contract agreement to issue C form. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the respondent NEEPCO to issue the required C forms to the Petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.