2021 (4) TMI 1037 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Levy of sales tax on the entire sales turnover - eligibility of tax deduction as per Rule-3 of the KST Rules - HELD THAT - It is evident that the dealer is supposed to pay net tax to the Government on its sales and net tax for the purposes of this Act, means the difference between the 'output tax and input tax', which is the amount of net tax. Input tax is levied only in case of sale of taxable goods through a dealer - In the instant case, the KSBCL is exempt from tax and therefore, the petitioner does not pay any tax on the purchases made by it and there is not Input tax in the hands of the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner has no Input tax in its hands. The petitioner therefore, cannot be permitted to contend that it is liable to pay tax only on value addition and not on the entire amount. The substantial questions of law are answered against the petitioner and in favour of the respondent - Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was right in levying tax on the entire sales turnover?
2. Whether the petitioner is eligible for tax deduction as per Rule-3 of the KST Rules?

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in the retail sales of liquor, food, and soft drinks, challenged the levy of tax on liquor sales under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The petitioner contended that the tax should only be imposed on the value addition made at each level of sale. The petitioner argued that the Karnataka State Breweries Corporation Limited (KSBCL), from whom they purchased liquor, was exempt from tax, and therefore, the petitioner should not be taxed on the entire sales turnover. However, the Additional Advocate General argued that since the petitioner collected tax from consumers on the entire amount of sale, they were liable to pay tax on the entire sales turnover. The court examined Section 10 of the Act, which defines output tax, input tax, and net tax. It was observed that the dealer is required to pay net tax to the government on sales, which is the difference between output tax and input tax. In this case, since the KSBCL was exempt from tax, the petitioner did not have any input tax. Therefore, the court held that the petitioner was liable to pay tax on the entire sales turnover, dismissing the petitioner's argument for tax only on value addition.

Issue 2:
The petitioner had filed a revision under Section 65(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, challenging the judgment of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) regarding the levy of tax. The petitioner had also sought tax deduction as per Rule-3 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules. The court analyzed the provisions of the VAT Act and various notifications related to tax levies on liquor sales. The petitioner's counsel argued that the purpose of introducing VAT was to collect tax on value addition at each sale level and that the KSBCL, being a CL-11 license holder exempt from tax, should not be included in the turnover for VAT calculation. However, the court upheld the decisions of previous cases and ruled against the petitioner, stating that since the petitioner did not have any input tax due to the exemption of the KSBCL, they were liable to pay tax on the entire sales turnover. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the tax assessment and denying the petitioner's claim for tax deduction under Rule-3 of the KST Rules.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the tax assessment on the entire sales turnover and rejecting the petitioner's claim for tax deduction as per Rule-3 of the KST Rules.