Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2015 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 945 - KERALA HIGH COURTValidity of Notices issued based on Circular 33 of 2006 - Whether appellants were transporters and not dealers - Held that:- There was no intention discernible to treat the transporter as a dealer and consequently no obligation was cast on him to pay any tax, interest or penalty; which a dealer is required to pay - only a false declaration and a finding of collusion could invite penalty - the need to make correct and complete declaration and filing of the same before the officer in charge of a check post or barrier, was also upheld on the very same reasoning - the challenge based on violation under 301 of the Constitution of India was hence negatived. Penalty imposed for non-registration and the subsequent issuance of registration - Requirement for registration u/s 15 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 – Held that:- The mandate of registration was upheld on the premise that this too merely aided the authorities in checking the evasion of tax and finding that registration makes it feasible for the authorities to trace out the defaulting dealers through the transporters - a State, making an enactment under Entry 54 of List II of Seventh Schedule would be competent to provide for registration of transporters of goods, intended for sale within or without the State and providing for measures to check evasion of tax, by requiring such registered transporters to file returns and to make declaration as prescribed for effective implementation of the enactments. The power though not specifically enumerated, were held to be incidental and ancillary powers, conferred on the legislature to further the purpose of taxation enactments and to ensure due payment of tax and check evasion thereon - There can be no quarrel that if such provisions are available under a statute, the same have to be upheld on the principles of legislative competence as declared by the aforesaid binding precedents - The reliance placed by the learned Government Pleader, to that extent is only proper - it is not the constitutionality of such provision that arise, and it is the lack of a provision obliging the transporters, to take registration, that has been urged - there is absolutely no bar on the legislature, to provide for registration of transporting agencies, who have an intimate and proximate connection, to the sales and purchase of goods, and also provide for filing of returns, and inspection of accounts of such transporting agencies - The statute have not provided for the same, the Commissioner as was noticed, is not entitled to bring in such transporting agencies invoking the administrative powers conferred u/s 3 of the KVAT Act - the petitioner is not liable to be registered.
|