9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 137 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of assessment order - Reversal of Input Tax Credit - Validity of Section 19(2)(v) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - HELD THAT - The assessment proceeds to reverse the petitioner's claim for Input Tax Credit (ITC) in terms of Section 19(2)(v) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and has not taken note of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (CT) (FAC) VERSUS M/S. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LIMITED 2022 (4) TMI 1204 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has held that The position as regards section19(2)(ii) and the proviso inserted vide Act 28 of 2013 and its subsequent omission vide Amendment Act 5 of 2015 and the claim of refund, shall be examined. In light of the categoric findings and conclusion of the Division Bench of this Court to the effect that the amendment to Section 19(2)(v) is curative and declaratory, the petitioner is entitled to the relief as sought and the impugned assessment order is set aside - petition allowed.
Issues:
Challenge to impugned order of assessment dated 19.04.2022 regarding Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Section 19(2)(v) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Analysis: The judgment delivered by Honourable Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth addressed the challenge posed by the petitioner against the impugned order of assessment dated 19.04.2022. The assessment in question reversed the petitioner's claim for Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Section 19(2)(v) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. It was noted that the assessment did not consider the decision of the Division Bench of the Court in a previous case. The Division Bench had analyzed the nature of the amendment to Section 19(2)(v) and concluded that it was curative and declaratory in nature. The judgment highlighted the importance of interpreting the legislative provisions to ascertain their applicability and whether they are curative or substantive in nature. The retrospective effect of the curative provision was emphasized, indicating that it is effective from a date prior to its enactment. The amendment aimed to rectify a defect and restore the original position, ensuring that dealers involved in interstate sales benefit from the provision. The judgment emphasized that the right to avail ITC by manufacturers is absolute once the inputs are used in the manufacturing process within the State, irrespective of subsequent interstate or intrastate sales. Consequently, the Division Bench's conclusion that the amendment to Section 19(2)(v) is curative and declaratory led to the setting aside of the impugned assessment order in favor of the petitioner. Overall, the judgment recognized the significance of the Division Bench's findings regarding the curative nature of the amendment to Section 19(2)(v) and its retrospective effect. This determination played a crucial role in granting relief to the petitioner and overturning the impugned assessment order. As a result, the Writ Petition was allowed, with no costs incurred, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.
|
