Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2010 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (9) TMI 987 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxWhether the framing of rule 11(3) is ultra vires section 20 of the OVAT Act? Whether rule 11(3) framed by the State Government in exercise of its power under section 94 is unguided, unfettered upon the State Government and whether prescription of the said rule is for the purpose of carrying out the object of the Act? Held that:- When section 20(3), proviso (d) makes it explicitly clear as to what is the extent of statutory right given to the dealer for grant of input-tax credit. Further the particulars required to be furnished in annexure IIA of form VAT 201 also cannot be termed as arbitrary. The said particulars/information are required to be furnished by the traders for the purpose of availing of input-tax credit while selling the manufactured goods in the course of inter-State sale. That is what is provided in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-rule (3) of rule 11. The strong reliance placed upon the clause (f) of sub-rule (3) of rule 11 and the particulars provided in annexure IIA form VAT 201 cannot be made use of for the purpose of justification of getting more benefit than what is not provided under the proviso (d) of sub-section (3) of section 20. Clause (1) of sub-rule (3) is not required to be provided for the purpose of determination of input-tax credit in view of the clear provision in proviso (d) of sub-section (3) of section 20. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit whatsoever on any one of the legal contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners. The writ petitions are devoid of merit and are accordingly dismissed.
|