9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on no where empowers the authority to treat the non-registration under section 10 of the 2011 Act as a violation of provisions of VAT Act, 2002. And as evident from section 8 of the 2011 Act, the applicability of 2002 Act has been subjected to the provisions of the 2011 Act. In the case at hand evidently, the provisions of the Act of 2002 are subjected to that of the provisions of 2011 as is evident from section 8 of the Act of 2011 which rules out the applicability of sub-section (6) of section 20 of the Act of 2002 - When the impugned orders tested on the anvil of above analysis, the order directing for imposition of penalty under sub-section (6) of section 20 for violation of section 10 of the Act of 2011 cannot be approved of. The order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iyam, 2011 with effect from April 1, 2011, to levy tax on luxuries, entertainments, amusements and advertisements exhibited in the State of Madhya Pradesh. 5. As per section 3 thereof every hotelier or proprietor whose turnover during a period of twelve months immediately preceding the commencement of the Act of 2011 exceeds rupees five lacs incurs liability to pay tax in respect of any advertisement, luxury or entertainment provided by him in Madhya Pradesh. Sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Act further stipulates that every hotelier or proprietor to whom sub-section (1) does not apply, shall be liable to pay tax under this Act in respect of any advertisement, luxury or entertainment provided by him in Madhya Pradesh with effect from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... easonable opportunity of being heard, direct him to pay by way of penalty a sum not exceeding five thou sand rupees, subject to a minimum of five hundred rupees." 9. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner's annual turnover is more than Five Lacs in a given financial year. As such, the provisions of 2011 Act are applicable. The petitioner got registered on March 3, 2012, i.e., much after the period prescribed under section 10(2) of the 2011 Act. Thereafter, paid tax under the Act of 2011 for the period from April 1, 2011 to March 2, 2012 to the tune of ₹ 18,24,860. That by assessment order dated March 2, 2013, the tax under 2011 Act for the period from April 1, 2011 to March 30, 2012 was assessed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In our judgment, the word 'luxuries' in the entry refers to activities of indulgence, enjoyment or pleasure . . ." 15. As regard to interpretation of taxing statute, trite it is that it is to strictly construed. In A. V. Fernandez v. State of Kerala [1957] 8 STC 561 (SC) ; AIR 1957 SC 657, it is held (page 570 in 8 STC) : "29. . . . in construing fiscal statutes and in determining the liability of a subject to tax one must have regard to the strict letter of the law and not merely to the spirit of the statute or the substance of the law. If the Revenue satisfies the court that the case falls strictly within the provisions of the law, the subject can be taxed. If, on the other hand, the case is not covered within the fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r non-registration is engrafted under sub-section (3) of section 10. The provision no where empowers the authority to treat the non-registration under section 10 of the 2011 Act as a violation of provisions of VAT Act, 2002. And as evident from section 8 of the 2011 Act, the applicability of 2002 Act has been subjected to the provisions of the 2011 Act. Section 8 of the 2011 Act envisages : "8. Subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules made there under, the provisions of the VAT Act and the rules made, order and notifications issued thereunder, including the provisions relating to returns, assessment, self-assessment, reassessment, payment and recovery of tax, accounts, detection and prevention of tax evasion, refund, appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect meaning, in our opinion, is 'conditional upon'." 21. In Union of India v. Brigadier P. S. Gill and Krite Kumar Awasthi v. Union of India [2012] 4 SCC 463, the Supreme Court dwelling upon the issue which cropped up in the context of section 30 and section 31 of the Arms Tribunal Act, 2007 as to whether the aggrieved party can file appeal against any such final decision or order of the Tribunal under section 30 of the Act of 2007 before the Supreme Court without taking resort to procedure prescribed under section 31 thereof. While taking into consideration the law laid down in K. R. C. S. Balakrishna Chetty & Sons & Co. v. State of Madras [1961] 12 STC 114 (SC) ; AIR 1961 SC 1152 ; State of Bihar v. Bal Mukund Sah [2004] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
