Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (1) TMI 907

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o an iron merchant, registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter called the TNVAT Act, 2006) and now under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of assessment passed by the respondent for the year 2009-10. 3. Earlier, the petitioner approached this Court and filed W.P.No.4149 of 2014 challenging the assessment order dated 30.7.2013 alleging to be contrary to Section 3(4)(b) of the TNVAT Act, 2006. This Court, while disposing of the said writ petition by order dated 04.7.2016, observed that the respondent had stated that the petitioner's total turnover crossed Rs. 50 lakhs during the previous year i.e. 2008-09 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent has passed the impugned order in this writ petition. 6. In the objections filed by the petitioner, they had specifically stated that they had filed Form I returns, claimed input tax credit and submitted copies of those returns and proof of payment of tax. The petitioner also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of C.K.G. Agencies Vs. AC (CT) [reported in (2012) 54 VST 501]. The petitioner further pointed out that when mistakes were brought to the notice pursuant to the inspection, they immediately submitted Form I returns under Rule 7(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007 for the months from April 2009 to January 2010 and subsequently submitted the returns for the months of February 2010 and March 201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it for the period from April 2007 onwards and whether the respondent was right in restricting it for a period of 90 days, since I have already held that Section 3(4) of the TNVAT Act, would have no application to the instant case.  The question of restricting the input tax credit for 90 days is incorrect.  If such is the situation, it goes without saying that the petitioner would be entitled to input tax credit for the entire period, as the petitioner has paid higher rate of tax.  This very issue has been answered by this Court in the case of C.K.G. Agencies vs. Asst. Commissioner (CT), reported in (2012) 54 VST 501 (Mad). The operative portion of the order is as follows: 'The petitioner herein opted to pay compounding .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndividual assessee is applicable to the case of the petitioner also. Consequently, the order suffered an illegality. The petitioner made a representation by way of rectification petition on February 9, 2010, pointing out to the clarification dated August 29, 2007 and requested the respondent to cancel the demand. By proceedings dated February 23, 2010, the respondent rejected the prayer by stating that it is open to the petitioner to get necessary relief from the appropriate forum against the order passed by the assessing authority. The petitioner submits that having regard to the clarification given by the Commissioner, which is binding on the assessing officer, once the petitioner crosses the turnover of Rs. 50,00,000, he is eligible for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thority, it is necessary that the assessment has to be reviewed in accordance with law as well as the clarification. It however has to be noted that in the rectification petition filed by the petitioner, there are hardly any details as to the month when the turnover exceeded Rs. 50,00,000 limit for the purpose of granting the benefit of input-tax credit.  In the circumstances, the order passed by the respondent is set aside and the petitioner is hereby directed to furnish the details of the turnover crossing Rs. 50,00,000. On such furnishing of the details, the respondent shall take into account the Commissioner's clarification and pass orders in accordance with law.  With the above observation, the writ petitions are di .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates