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 (10) TMI 516

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n verification, if the stated facts of the penalty and deposit made are true, the amounts remaining with the State has to be necessarily given adjustment of, when satisfying the amounts under the amnesty scheme. The further claim is with respect to 20% of the demand paid as per stay orders in the years 2002-03 and 2003-04 which comes to a total of ₹ 1,56,08,625/-. If such deposit is made, necessarily the same would also have to be given credit and deducted from the total amounts due in the amnesty scheme. It is made clear that in none of these amounts, there can be a claim now raised of appropriation to interest. The penalty having been set aside and the order of assessment in the years 2002-03 & 2003-04, also having been set aside by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Tribunal. S.T.Rev.Nos.5/2007 and 7/2007 are from the assessments for the years 2000-01 and 2001-02. The question of law raised in these revisions is as to whether the respondent-Procter and Gamble Home Products Limited (PGHPL) is liable to tax under Section 5(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 ('KGST Act' for short) for the sale of products under the brand name Procter and Gamble . The Tribunal held that the PGHPL and manufacturer, Procter and Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Limited (PGHHCL), who sold to PGHPL, are both permitted to use the brand name by the principal Company based in the United States of America. The manufacturer also being permitted to use the brand name, the sale from the manufacturer to PGHPL was fou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m orders at the various stages of the statutory scheme as also that of the tax paid by the manufacturer, the assessee filed a writ petition which is also posted along with the revisions. It is also alleged that the years 2002-03 and 2003-04 were not considered for amnesty now, though included in the earlier order passed. The writ petition is filed seeking an appropriate revision of the order passed under the amnesty scheme produced as Ext.P7. 4. The learned Senior Government Pleader points out that as far as the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04, the order under amnesty was already passed as per Ext.P4 in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner has a contention that the order is no longer in force for reason of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essee is to give adjustments insofar as the payments made by the assessee pending litigation as also the tax paid by PGHHCL for the sale to the assessee. 7. To understand the different components claimed adjustment by the assessee, one has to look at Ext.P1 application under the amnesty scheme filed by the petitioner-assessee. In the years 1998-99 to 2002-03, there is a total amount of ₹ 3,28,34,036.09 paid by PGHHCL, the manufacturer, as tax with respect to the sale made to the assessee. The same has to be considered for deduction under Rule 32(13B) of the KGST Rules, 1963 on proper proof being produced before the AO. The further adjustments claimed is on the tax paid by way of demand draft of ₹ 25,00,000/- for the year 2003 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to its expiry. The said directions are issued only in the context of the facts arising in this case, where the assessee had voluntarily accepted the amnesty scheme within the time and orders were also issued by the AO. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. The assessee on production of the certified copy of the judgment as also proof of deposit pursuant to interim orders and also the details of tax paid by the manufacturer, shall be heard and sufficient modification made in the amnesty orders at Exts.P4 P7 within a month from the date of hearing. If the assessee has to pay any further amounts, the same shall be paid within one month of the order, with interest applicable from the date of expiry of amnesty scheme to the date of paymen .....

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