Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2008 (1) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2008 (1) TMI 924 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues involved: Interpretation of Section 17D of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act regarding the requirement of payment of entire tax amount for filing appeals against assessment orders completed under the Fast Track method.

Summary:
The petitioner, an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, filed returns for the assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05. Assessment for these years was completed under Section 17D of the Act, and the petitioner filed appeals against the assessment orders. The petitioner had not paid the disputed tax levied as per the assessment orders, leading to the Tribunal not registering the appeals. The writ petition sought to quash the assessment orders or direct the 2nd respondent to register the appeals.

The petitioner argued that the requirement of payment of the entire tax amount under Section 17D(5) applies only to ex parte assessment orders, not to the assessment orders in question. However, the court held that Section 17D(5) mandates that appeals against assessment orders issued under the Fast Track method can only be filed if the dealer has paid the entire tax amount, without making a distinction for ex parte orders. The court emphasized that the statutory provision is clear and unambiguous, requiring payment of the entire tax amount for any appeal arising from an assessment under Section 17D.

Despite the petitioner's reliance on the Budget Speech 2007 and Circular No. 17/07, the court found that these did not support the petitioner's case. As the petitioner had not paid the disputed tax estimated by the Fast Track Team, the requirement of Section 17D(5) remained unsatisfied, justifying the Tribunal's decision to decline entertaining the appeal. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates