9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well-known terminology in common parlance and mosquito repellents are not the insecticides which are envisaged under entry No. 29 of Schedule II(a) of the TVATAct. Therefore, on merits we do not find any illegality in the order. No penalty should have been imposed on the present petitioner. The assessee had approached the assessing officer and asked for a clarification. It was the duty of the assessing officer to clarify the matter, but he did not do so and kept sleeping over the matter for two long years. Therefore, the assessee, according to him, has not collected tax at 12 per cent., but has collected tax at four per cent. We have held that the assessee is liable to pay tax at 12.5 per cent. But there is no wilful evasion of tax in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmittedly, no reply to that letter was given. But, later on the Department on 7/10th July, 2007, clarified that tax was leviable at 12.5 per cent. 3. In the present petition we are dealing with the assessment year 2005- 06. Sri Saha, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that once the petitioner had sought for a clarification and no clarification was given, the assessee collected tax from the customers only at four per cent. Therefore, it would be unjust to make him liable to pay tax at 12.5 per cent. 4. Entry No. 29 in Schedule II(a) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (for short, TVAT Act ) reads as follows: Chemical fertilizers, biofertilizer and micronutrients, also plant growth promoters and regulators, herbicid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order. 6. Having held so, we are clearly of the view that no penalty should have been imposed on the present petitioner. The assessee had approached the assessing officer and asked for a clarification. It was the duty of the assessing officer to clarify the matter, but he did not do so and kept sleeping over the matter for two long years. Therefore, the assessee, according to him, has not collected tax at 12 per cent., but has collected tax at four per cent. We have held that the assessee is liable to pay tax at 12.5 per cent. But there is no wilful evasion of tax in this case because he had honestly put forth his case before the taxing authority and if the taxing authority felt that there was no merit in the submission of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
