9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s' orders in a routine manner without considering the documents on record submitted by the petitioner independently on merits, which would prove that the product sale consideration under the contract between the petitioner and its customer/client, is inclusive of warranty period replacements and has already suffered tax? 4.3. Whether the KAT was justified in rejecting the contentions of the petitioner that the Warranty replacements of spares outside the State is non taxable turnover, as such it does not attract tax under the CST Act? 4.4. Whether the KAT grossly erred in not even considering the petitioner's case against levy of interest? 4.5. Whether the KAT grossly erred in not even considering the petitioner's case a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority in its order has clearly mentioned that the appellant even after utilizing the opportunity afforded to it failed to file the statutory forms. Therefore, it is clear that the appellant had not produced or submitted any such documents in support of his contention. Sec.6A of the CST Act reads thus: 6-A: Burden of proof, etc., in case of transfer of goods claimed otherwise than by way of sale. (1) Where any dealer claims that he is not liable to pay tax under this Act, in respect of any goods, on the ground that the movement of such goods, from one State to another was occasioned by reason of transfer of such goods by him to any other place of his business or to his agent or principal, as the case may be, and not by reason of sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by a higher authority on the ground that the findings of the assessing authority are contrary to law, and such reassessment or revision may be done in accordance with the provisions of general sales tax law of the state. Explanation:- In this section,"assessing authority", in relation to a dealer, means the authority for the time being competent to assess the tax payable by the dealer under this Act. 10. When the appellant failed to substantiate his contention by placing valid material, it cannot termed as the warranty replacements and believe the same. Further it is clear that neither in KVAT Act nor in CST the contention of the appellant is not covered and no such exemption is provided in the statute regarding the alleged warranty r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal has not properly considered the questions which arise for consideration and hence this Court may consider in the present petition. 9. As such, if the contention is examined in the light of the finding recorded by the Tribunal and more particularly at paragraph-10 it appears that, the Tribunal, upon appreciation of the evidence has found that the appellant has failed to substantiate his contention by placing valid material. 10. In our view, when, upon the appreciation of the evidence produced on record, the finding is recorded by the Tribunal that there is failure to discharge the burden and if the appellant is to contend that there was no failure to discharge the burden, such shall be an essentially a question of fact and no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
