9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued, which is not permissible as per the proviso to Section 42(2). The proviso stands against the assessee and there could be no revised return accepted by the Assessing Officer against the clear mandate of the statutory provision. Invocation of section 67 - Held that:- Section 10A applies to a purchasing dealer and these are specific offences enumerated under Section 10, none of which is attracted here. Here the offence is of evasion of tax payable under the CST Act, on the interstate sale of rubber, by claiming an exemption without complying with the condition of the exemption notification. The penalty imposed under the CST Act is only proper - decided in favor of Revenue. Revision dismissed. - OT. Rev. No. 1 of 2015 - - - Date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n assessee was entitled to claim exemption from payment of tax on its inter-state trade or commerce of natural rubber in the event of the assessee having paid tax under the KVAT Act. The assessee claimed exemption from August, 2008 onwards. 3. The Intelligence Officer on the basis of details of transaction effected by the assessee for the year 2008-09 found that the assessee had not paid tax on its purchase. The assessee had purchased natural rubber and other goods from the registered dealer on payment of tax coming to ₹ 4,98,288/-. The entire amount was claimed as input tax credit under the KVAT Act. Hence there was no sufferance of tax on its purchase. The exemption claimed was for a total turnover of ₹ 3,61,92,304/-. The t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stake in the annual return submitted by the assessee with reference to the audited figures he shall file revised annual return, rectifying the omission or mistake, along with audited certificate. The proviso also indicates that the sub-section shall not apply to any dealer against whom any penal action is initiated in respect of such (meaning that relating to a discrepancy in the return) omission or mistake under any provision of the Act. 6. Rule 60 of the Rules specify that the audit report has to be filed before 31st October of the subsequent year. The subject assessment year in the present revision is 2008-09. Hence as submitted by the assessee they could have filed an audit report on or before 31.10.2009. However, the revised return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e surprised that such a contention is raised by a Senior Counsel and reject it immediately. We have to just notice subsection (2A) of Section 9, which makes all provisions of the general sales tax law, relating to offences, interest and penalties with respect to payment and collection of tax under the CST Act. Further Section 10A applies to a purchasing dealer and these are specific offences enumerated under Section 10, none of which is attracted here. Here the offence is of evasion of tax payable under the CST Act, on the interstate sale of rubber, by claiming an exemption without complying with the condition of the exemption notification. The penalty imposed under the CST Act is only proper and hence we answer the questions of law against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
