9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sanjiv Khanna, J 1. The present appeal under Section 81 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (Act, for short) impugns order dated 30th November, 2011 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax, Delhi. By the impugned order the Tribunal has disposed of the application under Section 76(4) of the Act for waiver of pre-deposit with the condition that the appellant herein shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omprised of taxable turnover @ 1%, 4% and 12.5% and also included exempted turnover. The total output tax liability on the aforesaid turnover as per the appellant was Rs.21,77,506/-. The appellant had carried forward tax credit from the previous period of Rs.31,31,446/-. After adjusting the output tax liability of Rs.21,77,506/- from this tax credit, the appellant claimed that it had a tax credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year 2008-09 was treated as valid/correct return and the revised return by the assessee was treated as null and void return. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 27.10.2010 held that the appellant-assessee should have filed objections and could not have revised the return. It may be noted that the Assessing Officer did not rework or question and upset the figures of the original return. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand on the basis of original return. The revised return has been rejected as void. In these circumstances, we feel that the appellant should not be asked to make a pre-deposit before the hearing of the appeals. Even after the audit is carried out under the Act, the tax assessed was in minus figure and the figures in the original return remain untouched. The question of law is accordingly answe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
