Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2017 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 1172 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxPenalty - interest - PVAT Act - Whether the VAT Tribunal Punjab Chandigarh has grossly erred in upholding the order of the Excise & Taxation Officer-cum-Notified Authority as upheld by the Deputy Excise & Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) Patiala imposing penalty u/s 53, u/s 60 and levying interest u/s 32(1) of the Punjab VAT Act? Held that: - It is apparent that the appellant did not challenge the order of this Court in so far as it dealt with the constitutional validity of Section 19 of the Act. The importance of this is that the appellant before us accepted the judgement of this Court at least on the issue of the constitutional validity of the Act. Due date or payment of interest - Held that: - the due date for payment is not the date of the final assessment, but the date stipulated in Rule 36. Under Section 26(3), every person is bound to pay the full amount of tax due from him as per the provisions of the Act. Thus, liability for payment of interest under Section 32(1) is from the due date for payment. The due date for payment would be the date on which payment is liable to be made under Rule 36. Section 26(3) requires every person to pay “the full amount of tax due from him as per the provisions of the Act” and not the amount which according to the assessee is payable. The words “full amount of tax due from him as per provisions of this Act” refer to the amount actually payable under the Act and not the amount which according to the assessee is payable. Section 11-B of the Rajasthan Act is similar to Section 32(4) and not to Section 32(1) of the Act with which we are concerned. It is not possible to incorporate the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 32 into sub-section (1) of Section 32. Sub-section (4) in fact is a separate and independent liability in addition to the liability under subsection (1) There is no reason to absolve the appellant of the liability under Sections 32(1), 53 and 60 - appeal dismissed - decided against assessee.
|