2025 (3) TMI 186 - HC - VAT / Sales Tax

Challenge to appellate order by which assessment order was confirmed - whether the petitioner was right in his contention that the output tax demand for the period during which the eligibility certificate was not renewed or rejected namely 4.3.2015 to 31.3.2015 could be adjusted with the forwarded accumulated input tax credit? - HELD THAT - The learned tribunal had rightly took into consideration the provisions of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act and found that the rejection of the renewal of the eligibility certificate will render the petitioner/dealer ineligibility for output tax for discharging the liability the dealer will have to pay the taxes. However the claim of the petitioner/dealer to adjust the carry forward input tax which was carried forward to the subsequent quarter is not feasible as there is no such provision under the Act. Conclusion - The learned tribunal was perfectly right in holding that the output liability for the rejected period namely from 4.3.2015 to 31.3.2015 was to be paid by the writ petitioner within 30 days of such rejection in terms of Rule 180 of the said Rules and having not done so the authorities were justified in demanding the same by passing the impugned order. The petitioner has not made out any case for interference with the order passed by the learned tribunal - Petition dismissed.

Summary

The Calcutta High Court upheld the decision of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal regarding the adjustment of output tax demand with forwarded input tax credit. The Court found that there is no provision under the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act for such adjustment, and upheld the tribunal's ruling that the dealer must pay the output tax liability for the rejected period. The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any grounds for challenging the tribunal's decision.