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

2015 (2) TMI 1393

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of ALTHAF SHOES (P) LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT) , VALLUVARKOTTAM ASSESSMENT CIRCLE, CHENNAI-6 [ 2011 (10) TMI 567 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] , wherein this Court has held The mere fact that the Department had not made an assessment on the dealer's vendor, per se, could not stand in the way of the assessing officer considering the claim of the dealer under section 19 of the Act. Going by section 17 which provided that the burden on the purchasing dealer rested to the extent of showing that he was not liable to tax under the Act and read in the context of the fact that the petitioner-dealer had given his sellers' TIN number and had also produced the invoices evidencing the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 4. In support of the above contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Althaf Shoes (P) Ltd., vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Chennai reported in [2012] 50 VST 179 (Mad), wherein this Court has held as follows:- ... The mere fact that the Department had not made an assessment on the dealer's vendor, per se, could not stand in the way of the assessing officer considering the claim of the dealer under section 19 of the Act. Going by section 17 which provided that the burden on the purchasing dealer rested to the extent of showing that he was not liable to tax under the Act and read in the context of the fact that the petitioner-deale .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... viso to section 19(1) of the Act. It was another matter that the selling dealer had not paid the collected tax. The liability had to be fastened on the selling dealer and not on the petitioner-dealer which had shown proof of payment of tax on purchases made. The orders were liable to be set aside . 7. Further, in the decision rendered by this Court in W.P.Nos.25996 to 25998 of 2014 dated 17.10.2014, this Court, by referring the two decisions cited supra, in paragraph Nos.5 and 6, has held as follows:- 5. This Court in the case of Althaf Shoes P. Ltd., Vs.Assistant Commissioner (CT), Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Chennai -6 reported in (2012) 50 VAR 179 (Mad) held that a perusal of rule 10 of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... taking recourse to that, the Department could not deny the claim of the petitioner. 6. In the light of the above decision, the observation made by the respondent in the impugned order is wholly unsustainable. Further in the case of Sri Vinayaga Agencies Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Vadapalani-I Asssessment Circle, Chennai and Another reported in (2013) 60 VST 283 (Mad), this Court held that there is no power with the assessing authority to revoke input-tax credit on ground selling dealer has not paid tax and it was held that at the time of filing the self-assessment return under Section 22 (2), the petitioner dealer had followed rule 10(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007 and therefore, could not be said to have wrongly .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 10. It is made clear that the petitioner is directed to appear in person and produce the documents on 30.03.2015 and on such appearance and production of documents, the respondent is directed to consider the same and after conducting enquiry and giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard on 30.03.2015, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter. On 30.03.2015, if the petitioner fails to avail the opportunity for any reason whatsoever, the authority is empowered to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, without being influenced by the orders that are set aside by this Court. The writ p .....

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