Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2011 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (12) TMI 479 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURTWhether the petitioner is entitled to be taxed in accordance with section 5(3) read with second proviso to Explanation II of the Sixth Schedule? Held that:- For the purpose of allowing rebate in such a case, the burden is certainly on the dealer to satisfy the revisional authority as well as the second appellate authority. They failed to do so. The Tribunal observed that the appellate authority found that the petitioner did not produce any credible evidence for discharging the burden. Having not produced any evidence before the revisional authority as well as Tribunal, we are afraid the petitioner cannot sustain these revisions under section 22(1) of the Act. The order of the Tribunal does not suffer from any error of law. One cannot ignore the fact that the Sixth Schedule was substituted with effect from April 1, 1995 by reason of A. P. Act No. 22 of 1995. Therefore, unless and until the opening stock on which the tax was paid at the first point of sale is available and the closing stock is entered correctly, it is not possible to allow the rebate under the second proviso to the Sixth Schedule. In so far as adding of the impugned turnover of ₹ 5,57,623 it was found that even according to the dealer, the disclosed sales stood at ₹ 67,56,133 as against the assessed turnover of ₹ 61,98,510. Hence, when the revisional authority added back the turnover which was not subjected to tax, we do not find any error therein. Appeal dismissed.
|