9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 574 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxWhether the dealer can file tax invoices and forms VATC-4 claiming benefit of input tax credit at appellate stage and in that eventuality the liability of the dealer is to be redetermined - Held that - no notice for disposal of remand case was sent to the appellant and, therefore, the assesse could not produce the invoices and forms VATC-4. It was urged that the appellant is in possession of these forms and the assessee be permitted to submit the same before the Assessing Authority. - issue raised in this appeal is no longer res integra and stands concluded by the decisions of this court in 2013 (12) TMI 1447 - Punjab and Haryana High Court titled as Vijay Cottex Ltd., Panipat v. State of Haryana 2013 (12) TMI 1447 - Punjab and Haryana High Court and 2013 (12) TMI 1448 - Punjab and Haryana High Court titled as Jai Hanuman Stone Crushing Mills, Bhiwani v. State of Haryana 2013 (12) TMI 1448 - Punjab and Haryana High Court wherein it has been held that the dealer is entitled to produce form VATC-4 and tax invoices before the assessing authority who shall verify the same and pass a fresh order, in accordance with law. - Petition disposed of.
Issues:
1. Appeal against orders passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. 2. Dispute over the application of section 33(3) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 in ex parte cases. 3. Interpretation of provisions of section 33(3) of the VAT Act regarding the filing of returns and balance sheets. 4. Decision of the Tribunal to proceed ex parte in the presence of proxy counsel. Analysis: 1. The appellant filed an appeal against orders passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, leading to the present appeal before the High Court. The primary issue was whether the dealer could file tax invoices and forms VATC-4 at the appellate stage to claim input tax credit and whether this would require a redetermination of the dealer's liability. 2. The appellant argued that no notice for disposal of the remand case was sent, preventing the submission of invoices and forms VATC-4. It was contended that the appellant possessed these forms and should be allowed to submit them before the Assessing Authority. The court noted that the issue had been settled in previous cases, including Vijay Cottex Ltd., Panipat v. State of Haryana and Jai Hanuman Stone Crushing Mills, Bhiwani v. State of Haryana, where it was held that the dealer could produce form VATC-4 and tax invoices before the assessing authority for verification and a fresh order. 3. The court referred to the decisions in Vijay Cottex Ltd., Panipat and Jai Hanuman Stone Crushing Mills, Bhiwani, both decided on December 19, 2013, to dispose of the present appeal in the same terms. It was established that the dealer was entitled to produce form VATC-4 and tax invoices before the assessing authority for reevaluation and a fresh order in accordance with the law. The appeal was decided in favor of the appellant based on the precedents set by the aforementioned cases. 4. The judgment highlighted the importance of allowing dealers to submit necessary documentation at the appellate stage to claim input tax credit and have their liability reassessed accordingly. The court's decision was based on established legal principles and previous judgments, ensuring a fair and just resolution in line with the provisions of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003.
|
