9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1975 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxAllowance of Special Rebate - Section 12 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - omission and suppression or not - HELD THAT - Here, the assessee though had treated the wood, had sent the goods to its own unit at Chennai without any tax effect in the interstate transaction. This would disentitle the assessee from the special rebate under Section 12 of the Act of 2003. Whether the assessee in fact carried out any manufacture would not be a relevant consideration. Decided against assessee - revision allowed.
Issues:
1. Special rebate allowance in the case 2. Entitlement to special rebate under Section 12 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 Special Rebate Allowance: The High Court considered the substantial question of law regarding the special rebate in the case. The Tribunal had affirmed the estimation made by the First Appellate Authority, reducing the addition for probable omission and suppression equal to actual suppression. The Court found no question of law arising from this estimation and declined to answer the State's question on this aspect. Therefore, the Court did not find any grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's decision on the special rebate in this context. Entitlement to Special Rebate under Section 12: The Court analyzed whether the assessee was entitled to a special rebate under Section 12 of the Act. The assessee, engaged in furniture manufacturing, had purchased rubber wood, treated it, and sent it to its plant in another state for manufacturing. The Assessing Officer initially denied the special rebate claim, which was later overturned by the First Appellate Authority and affirmed by the Tribunal. The Court examined the proviso under Section 12, which requires goods used in manufacturing but sent outside the state without tax effect to be eligible for the rebate. As the assessee sent the goods to its own unit without any tax effect in the interstate transaction, the Court held that this action disentitled the assessee from the special rebate. The Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, setting aside the orders allowing the special rebate. In conclusion, the High Court allowed the revisions, directing the parties to bear their respective costs.
|
