2021 (2) TMI 482 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Time Limitation of assessment order - reversal of input tax credit on the inter-state sales effected to Government Departments - applicability of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 12.10.2018 in the case of TVS Motor Company Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others 2018 (10) TMI 887 - Supreme Court . HELD THAT - The tax case revision is allowed, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration. The Tribunal shall permit the petitioner dealer to file additional grounds of appeal duly supported by decisions and thereunder, the appeal shall be heard and decided on merits and in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to order under Puducherry Value Added Tax Act for assessment year 2008-09.
2. Interpretation of limitation stipulated under Section 24(6) of the Act.
3. Application of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in TVS Motor Company Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu.
4. Reversal of input tax credit on inter-state sales to Government Departments.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a dealer, filed a revision challenging the order made by the Puducherry Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 2008-09. The petitioner raised questions regarding the limitation period under Section 24(6) of the Act, the applicability of a Supreme Court judgment in TVS Motor Company Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, and the reversal of input tax credit on inter-state sales to Government Departments.

The High Court heard arguments from both parties and noted that similar issues were addressed in a previous case involving the petitioner. In the earlier case, it was determined that the dealer was not entitled to a concessional rate of tax on inter-state sales to the Defence Department due to the absence of Form-C Declarations. However, the legal landscape changed after a Supreme Court decision in October 2018, which emphasized allowing input tax credit without Form-C Declarations for sales to Government Departments.

Although the petitioner's legal contentions were not raised before the lower authorities, the High Court acknowledged the significance of the Supreme Court's decision. Consequently, the Court allowed the revision, set aside the Tribunal's order, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to present additional grounds of appeal based on the new legal interpretation and factual considerations.

In conclusion, the High Court applied the Supreme Court's decision to allow the petitioner to pursue their case with updated legal arguments. The Tribunal was directed to reconsider the matter, considering the new legal perspective and factual aspects. The substantial questions of law raised were left open for further examination, and no costs were awarded in this decision.