Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1756 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxLiability on short payment of tax - Huge difference between purchases and sales turnover - Annual Scrutiny cross verification of the buyer and seller as per Annexure& I Web report - Verification of purchase details from other dealer Annexure II and purchase details from this dealers annexure I - Check post Movement Details - Levy of tax on deletion of assets - Short payment of tax - Other income. Huge difference between purchases and sales turnover - Verification of purchase details from other dealer Annexure II and purchase details from this dealers annexure I - HELD THAT:- Difference between purchase and sales turnover, pertains to difference between purchases and sales turnover. According to the respondent, as articulated in the impugned order, from verification of books of accounts, it was noticed that the dealers had reported that their purchases during the year is normally low when compared to the sales and on this basis, tax was levied after examining the records furnished by the writ petitioner whereas Verification of purchase details from other dealer Annexure II and purchase details from this dealers annexure I pertains to claim of Input Tax Credit [ITC]. Here, the pivotal question is whether the purchases were made from unregistered dealers had to be considered. For examining this, the Assessing Authority had to necessarily look at Annexure& II of the sellers - though it appears that the heads are not severable, on a closer scrutiny, it comes out clearly that head nos.2 and 4 are clearly severable and therefore, the submission made by learned Senior counsel that the Assessing officer cannot dissect the heads, does not carry the writ petitioner any further in this case. In other words, this submission is negatived by this Court for the reasons that have been set out thus far. Short payment of tax - HELD THAT:- With regard to this head which is the other head under which tax has been levied, that pertains to short payment of tax and it is nobody s case that it is dovetailed with any of the other issues. Therefore, this head is a stand apart issue. Another aspect of the matter, which has been noticed by this Court is that there is no disputation or disagreement about the obtaining legal position that any number of assessment orders can be passed by an Assessing officer in exercise of revisional powers under Section 27 of TNVAT Act. When this is the obtaining legal position, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the respondent severing 2 out of 8 heads, deferring the same, levying tax on two other heads and dropping four other heads in favour of the writ petitioner dealer. With regard to alternate remedy rule itself, as already mentioned, it is clearly a self & imposed restraint by Courts exercising writ jurisdiction. In other words, alternate remedy rule is not a rule of compulsion, but it is a rule of discretion. Though the alternate remedy rule is not an absolute rule, Hon ble Supreme Court, in UNITED BANK OF INDIA VERSUS SATYAWATI TONDON AND OTHERS [2010 (7) TMI 829 - SUPREME COURT], held that in cases pertaining to tax, cess etc., alternate remedy rule has to be applied with utmost rigour. Petition dismissed.
|