2017 (2) TMI 1323 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Rectification order u/s 69(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003 - partial input rebate - time limitation - Held that - once an application has been filed for rectification, the same should be decided within a reasonable time frame - this Court directs respondent No.1 to decide the said application keeping in mind that the benefit of full rebate - respondent No.1 shall decide the application within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rectification order under Section 69(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a Private Limited Company registered under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, sought a rectification order from the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit & Recovery), respondent No.1. The petitioner claimed a partial input rebate on the value of rice bran in its returns for the tax periods 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2012-13. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes had passed a reassessment order, which was partially allowed on appeal. Subsequent appeals to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal led to remand for fresh assessment orders by the Assessing Authority.

The fresh assessment orders passed by respondent No.1 allowed only a partial rebate for the value of rice bran, despite the petitioner being eligible for full input rebate for other tax periods. The petitioner filed a rectification application under Section 69 of the Act on 18.8.2016, which remained pending without a response for six months. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking direction for the rectification application.

In response, the petitioner's counsel argued that the issue of full rebate had been settled by the High Court in a previous case, and despite this, respondent No.1 did not grant the relief. The counsel for the respondents assured that if directed, respondent No.1 would decide the application within a month. The High Court emphasized the need for timely resolution of rectification applications and directed respondent No.1 to decide the application within one month, considering the previous judgment and the full rebate granted for other tax periods.

Therefore, the High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent No.1 to decide the rectification application within one month, taking into account the precedent and the petitioner's eligibility for full rebate in line with previous judgments.