Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2008 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (7) TMI 940 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURTWhether the first respondent is justified in setting aside the order of the second respondent dated October 20, 2004 in rejecting the concessional rate of tax at four per cent on the supply made by the appellant to taluk panchayat in terms of the notification dated March 30, 1996? Held that:- From the perusal of section 8A that the Government may extend the benefit of tax either by reducing it or granting concessional rate to any particular class of persons and the same has to be interpreted considering the background of such instructions. In the instant case though taluk panchayats, zilla panchayats or gram panchayat are created under the one Act, in the first notification concessional rate of taxes has been shown to zilla panchayats only. Subsequently, in the year 1999, such benefit is also extended to taluk panchayats and gram panchayats. We have noticed that in the second notification concessional rate of tax granted to taluk panchayats and grama panchayats is with prospective effect and not from retrospective effect. Therefore, if the goods are supplied by the assessee to the taluk panchayat, the assessee cannot rely upon the first notification and at best if any supply is made subsequent to second notification, such concession can be made applicable. Even otherwise we cannot consider assessee as an aggrieved person. If the taluk panchayat has purchased A.C. sheets from the assessee, it is for the taluk panchayat to pay the tax as prescribed under the Sales Tax Act. Therefore, we do not see any merit in this appeal.
|