9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1633X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the revisional order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Raipur, on 3-4-2017 and the order dated 22-12-2015 passed by the Regional Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Bilaspur, whereby the appellant has been saddled with the liability to pay the Value Added Tax (henceforth 'the VAT') at the rate of 12.5% chargeable for 'cable' instead of tax at the rate of 4%, which the appellant had paid declaring the goods as 'industrial cable'. 2. The appellant executed a work contract with the Railways pertaining to Railway Signaling/Communication cables during the assessment year 2007-08. The appellant submitted its return, which was, later on, subjected to audit wherein an objection was raised as to the rate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax under Section 8 or Section 9 as the case may be, or that he is eligible for an input tax rebate under Section 13 shall be on the dealer. 8. Section 8 of the Act, 2005, in turn, provides that there shall be levied on goods specified in Schedule II, a tax at the rate mentioned in the corresponding entry in column (3) thereof; and such tax shall be levied on the taxable turnover of a dealer liable to pay tax under the Act. Similarly, Section 9 deals with levy of purchase tax providing that every dealer who in the course of his business purchases any goods specified in schedule II from any person other than a registered dealer or from a registered dealer in the circumstances in which no tax under section 8 is payable by that registered de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould have paid the tax at the rate of 12.5%. In the revisional proceedings preferred by the appellant the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Chhattisgarh passed an order dated 29-11-2014 remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer after examining the matter as the burden of proof lies on the department. 12. After the remission the assessing authority again provided opportunity of hearing to the appellant and passed an order on 22-12-2015 (Annexure - P/6 to the writ petition) again fastening liability on the appellant to pay tax @ 12.5% instead of 4%. 13. We have already referred to the provisions contained in Section 14 of the Act, 2005 concerning burden of proof. The language employed in the provision is plain and simple tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
