9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 855X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that would not have any impact on the petitioner's right to claim input tax credit, as, admittedly, the petitioner had produced the original tax invoices and showed that the sale price includes VAT, that they discharged their liability and that payments were effected through bank transactions. That apart, the second respondent, while completing the assessment, stated that in the absence of clarity, the petitioner's contention is not acceptable. This finding lacks clarity - If the second respondent was of the view that there was lack of clarity, nothing prevented the second respondent from calling upon the dealer to appear in person and clarify the issues arising out of the documents, which they had submitted. In such circumstances, this Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.2016 for all the assessment years. In all the notices, three issues were pointed out namely (i) tax due on sale difference (ii) input tax credit reversal for non production of of documents under Section 19(13) of the TNVAT Act and (iii) cross verification. 4. As regards the first issue, the petitioner admitted the proposal and paid the tax due and hence, there is no quarrel or dispute on the said issue. 5. Similarly, with regard to the third issue, the petitioner, while submitting their objections to the pre-revision notices, furnished details of the other end dealers, who had filed returns and paid taxes and found the information to be correct and the second respondent was satisfied that there is no discrepancy on their pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stice and fair play. Without prejudice to such a contention, the petitioner requested the second respondent to furnish the details of purchases such as bill numbers, date, name, month, on which, the claim of input tax credit is sought to be reversed to enable them to reconcile and get clarification and confirmation from their sellers. 9. With regard to the proposal to reverse the claim of input tax credit on the purchase turnover, based on the alleged cross verification of the other end dealers, as per Annexure II of their monthly return that they have not reported the purchases shown in Annexure I of their monthly return, it was stated that during the course of VAT audit, all purchases were found to be genuine and no suppression or omi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and supportive documents were placed for consideration before the second respondent. 13. While completing the assessments and passing the impugned orders, the second respondent stated that the contention of the petitioner is not acceptable for the reason that the input tax credit is allowable only to the extent of tax remitted to the Government at the other end, otherwise the input tax credit will not be allowed. It was further observed that the documents produced by the petitioner do not establish that the tax is remitted or not at the point of sales. Those objections were overruled by stating that in the absence of clarity, their contention is not sustainable. 14. After elaborately hearing the parties and carefully perusing the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t ought to have noted that the legal position with regard to this aspect has been considered in the case of Jinsasan Distributors, which decision was brought to the notice of the second respondent, wherein this Court held as follows : Allowing the petitions, that the petitioners had purchased the taxable goods from registered dealers, who had valid registration certificates, paid the tax payable thereon, availed of input tax credit and the Assessing Officers had passed orders granting such benefit. Therefore, the assessment orders granting input tax credit were validly passed. There was no cancellation of the registration certificates of the selling dealers at that point of time. The retrospective cancellation of the registration certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law, more so, when the second respondent has not taken into consideration the law laid down by this Court in several decisions, one of which being in the case of Jinsasan Distributors. 19. In view of all the above, the writ petitions are partly allowed and the finding given by the second respondent on the issue relating to reversal of the input tax credit for non production of documents under Section 19(13) of the TNVAT Act, is set aside. The second respondent is directed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, reconsider the documents, clarify any of the issues, if required, take note of the decision in the case of Jinsasan Distributors, which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
