9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 303 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxBenefit of compounding scheme Benefit of compounding scheme was not made available to assesse during assessment year in question only on ground that application made for obtaining benefit under said scheme during said assessment year was belated Held that - Tribunal vide impugned order held that it is undisputed that assessee had been given credit of said scheme in previous year There is no fixed time-limit in scheme disclosing period of its enforceability and, accordingly, there remains sufficient basis for bona fide on part of assessee to believe continuance of previously opted compounding scheme during relevant year Whereas, scheme has not been brought on record along with papers submitted with revision application Therefore there is no reason to interfere Decided against revenue.
Issues: Application of compounding scheme for assessment year 1995-96
Analysis: 1. Benefit of compounding scheme: The judgment deals with the application of a compounding scheme for the assessment year 1995-96. It is established that the compounding scheme was in force during that period, and the applicant had availed the benefits of the scheme in the preceding and subsequent assessment years. However, for the year in question, the benefit was denied due to a belated application. 2. Time-limit for application: The Tribunal found that the application for the compounding scheme was filed beyond the prescribed time-limit. Despite this, the applicant had received credit for the scheme in the previous and subsequent years. Notably, there was no fixed time-limit specified in the scheme regarding its enforceability, leading to a legitimate belief on the part of the assessee regarding the continuance of the scheme during the relevant year. 3. Contention and finding: The revisionist contested the Tribunal's finding, arguing that it contradicted the scheme's provisions. However, since the scheme itself was not presented as evidence with the revision application or independently before the court, the judges found no basis to interfere with the Tribunal's decision. As a result, the revision application was dismissed. In conclusion, the judgment underscores the importance of timely application under a compounding scheme while also highlighting the significance of providing relevant scheme details as evidence to support claims. The decision ultimately upholds the Tribunal's ruling based on the lack of substantial evidence presented before the court.
|
