9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record either before the first appellate authority or the adjudicating authority to establish the fact that petitioner has entered into an agreement with prospective buyers prior to commencement of the construction. Therefore, the aforesaid finding has to be termed as perverse. Since, in the relevant Assessment Years the position of law was not clear and therefore, failure of the petitioner to disclose the turnover has to be termed as bonafide based on the prevalent position of law and in the aforesaid factual background, the penal provisions levying penalty could not have been invoked by the authorities. Reliance can be placed in the case of EID. PARRY (I) LTD. OTHERS VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES AND ANOTHER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment for sale was entered into between the petitioner and one Mr.Sachin Mallya prospective buyer to purchase plot No.206 in the 3rd floor of the housing project. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes by an order dated 29.09.2007 inter alia held that petitioner had entered into contracts prior to commencement of the work and had suppressed the turnover willfully from disclosure. Thereafter, demand notices dated 29.09.2007 were issued demanding penalty of ₹ 7.50 Lakhs and ₹ 3.50 Lakhs under Section 12-A(1-A) of the Act for Assessment Years 2003-04 and 2004-05 respectively. The petitioner thereupon filed an appeal which was dismissed by first appellate authority by order dated 11.02.2009. The assessee thereupon filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so referred to an agreement for sale between it and one Mr.Sachin Mally dated 13.02.2004 in support of the contention that the contracts were entered into after commencement of the construction. 5. the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has submitted that since, in Assessment Year 2003-04 and 2004-05, the judgment of this court in Mittal Investment Corporation Ltd held the field. Therefore, the petitioner is liable to pay tax in respect of the contracts. It is further submitted that the petitioner was well aware that he was liable to pay tax on works contract entered into prior to commencement of the construction. 6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
