Advanced Search Options
VAT and Sales Tax - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 24877 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.
- 2020 (11) TMI 794 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Input Tax Credit - illegal transaction - reopening of assessment - reasons to believe - Section 29(1) of the VAT Act - HELD THAT:- There is no contention as to why and how the proceedings could be initiated without even recording any "reasons to believe" merely relying upon the Tax Audit report. Even otherwise the findings recorded in the Tax Audit report had to be controverted by the assessee, which the assessee did by filing the relevant affidavits and documents before the first Appellate Authority and thus no fault could be found with the said procedure. Even otherwise as the Tribunal has recorded that entire exercise was revenue neutral and there is no ground to suggest that the said finding is any way perverse or erroneous, no question of law, much less a substantial question of law arises for consideration by this Court. Revision dismissed.
- 2020 (11) TMI 793 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Principles of Natural Justice - proper service of SCN - Issue was not proceeded to be decided on merits - HELD THAT:- A bare perusal of the order impugned in the present revision reveals that the revisionist has not been heard by the Tribunal while passing the order dated 3.3.2020 and in view of the fact that the service was not effected properly on the revisionist, the order dated 3.3.2020 is set aside. The revisions are allowed in favour of the Assessee and against the Department.
- 2020 (11) TMI 792 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Stay of only 90% of the disputed tax, till the disposal of first appeal, instead of 100% stay - applicant has good case on the merit of the case, and financial condition is not good - HELD THAT:- Perusal of the orders impugned in the revision, make it clear that the appellate court as well as the Tribunal have neither considered prima facie case nor the financial hardship as pleaded by the revisionist before directing the deposit of 10% of the disputed tax. Thus, there are no hesitation in holding that the order passed by the Tribunal deserves to be set aside and is accordingly set aside to the extent that it directs to deposit 10% of the amount as the revisionist has placed on record the financial hardship. Tax revision is allowed.
- 2020 (11) TMI 791 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Maintainability of (second) appeal - first appeal had been numbered and heard on merits - fact that as per Sec.55(4) of the TNGST Act, an appeal would lie against an order passed u/s.55 of the Act is overlooked - in respect of the very same transaction, tax under the CST Act, 1956, had been paid in the State of Andhra Pradesh and the levy under the TNGST Act, 1959 - double taxation or not. HELD THAT:- The Original Assessment order does not merge with the Rectification Order passed by the Assessing Authority. In the present case, the Rectification as prayed by the Assessee only was allowed by the Assessing Authority himself and therefore, there are no reason for the Assessee to to file further Appeal against such Rectification Order in his own favour. It is difficult to understand what prevented the Assessee from assailing the Original Ass....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 752 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Stay on recovery steps - Section 55 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - HELD THAT:- This Court find that Exts.P1, P1(a) and P1(b) orders of assessment made by the 1st respondent are under challenge in Exts.P3, P3(a) and P3(b) appeals filed before the 2nd respondent appellate authority, which are accompanied by Exts.P4, P4(a) and P4(b) stay applications. This writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent appellate authority to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P4, P4(a) and P4(b) stay applications within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioner - Till such time, any recovery steps pursuant to Exts.P1, P1(a) and P1(b) assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance by respondents 1and 3.
- 2020 (11) TMI 722 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - availability of alternate remedy of appeal - Redetermination of tax liability of petitioner - HELD THAT:- There is no acceptable explanation from the Petitioner for not having resorted to that alternative remedy provided under the statute. This Court does not express any view on the correctness or otherwise on the merits of the controversy involved in the matter- Petition dismissed.
- 2020 (11) TMI 721 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reversal of ITC - reopening of assessment - Payment of the differential amount of tax due and penalty - HELD THAT:- Similar issue decided in the case of M/S. JKM GRAPHICS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [2017 (3) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where it was held that In the instant case, there is no challenge to the statutory provisions and the complaint of all the dealer is largely on the procedure adopted by the respective Assessing Officers. The Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes was conscious of the problems faced by the dealers as complaints were received which had lead to issuance of a circular as early as on 01.04.2015. The concerned assessing officer shall issue fresh show cause notice with all required details in respect of levy of tax for mismatch invoices and the Petitioner shall be entitled to submit its explanation within the prescribed time - impugned order set aside - petition allowed.
- 2020 (11) TMI 684 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Direction to prevent the official Respondents herein from lowering their seniority - Respondent was directly recruited as a Group-II Officer in the post of Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (ACTO)[now re-designated as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer(DCTO)], which is the entry level post in the Subordinate Services of the Commercial Taxes Department, and were in the post of Joint Commissioners/Deputy Commissioners when the writ petitions were filed - HELD THAT:- Division Bench set out the four principles that were adopted by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. 12786 of 1975 and affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 4 thereof. In addition, in paragraph 5, the Division Bench of this Court referred to and extracted an earlier order based on the statement of the learned Advocate General. The said extract refers to the statem....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 662 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Validity of impugned notice of default assessment of tax and interest and the impugned notice of default assessment of penalty - Section 137 of the Delhi Land Reform Act, 1954 - assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 - DVAT Act - HELD THAT:- Since the demands and penalties are the basis on which the impugned writ of demand dated 29th September, 2020 has been issued, this Court is of the view that petitioner must challenge the demands and penalties in accordance with the statutory mechanism. At this stage, Mr. Rajesh Mahna, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner shall withdraw the present writ petition and challenge the demands and penalties in accordance with the DVAT Act. The statement made by Mr. Rajesh Mahna is accepted by this Court and the petitioner is held bound by the same. To facilitate the filing of the said proceedings, the writ of demand dated 29th September, 2020 is stayed for a period of six weeks.
- 2020 (11) TMI 661 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Violation of principles of natural justice - Validity of assessment order - purchase omission committed by the petitioner - sales suppression - mismatch between the sales and purchases - TNVAT Act - HELD THAT:- Even though the petitioner has raised all the aforementioned contentions in the reply dated 07.03.2018 to the pre revision notice, dated 07.02.2018, the respondent under the impugned assessment order has not considered the same, but has passed the assessment order only based on the alleged sworn statements signed by the petitioner at the time of inspection by their Enforcement Wing Officials at the place of business of the petitioner. As seen from the impugned assessment order, no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner before passing of the impugned assessment order. This Court is of the considered view that principles of ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 660 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Validity of pre-assessment notices - alleged mismatch between the details contained in the annexures to the petitioners' returns - HELD THAT:- These Writ Petitions are pre-mature. It is true that the Officer has called upon the petitioner/assessee to appear and submit such details as may be available with it to substantiate the alleged mismatch between the details contained in the annexures to the petitioners' returns vis-a-vis the details contained in the annexures to the returns filed by the supplying/purchasing party dealers. This Court in M/S. JKM GRAPHICS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [2017 (3) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] has held that cases of mismatch should be addressed in a scientific manner and has also directed the setting up of a central mechanism to facilitate sharing of data inter se as....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 578 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Validity of assessment order - petitioner contends that it had paid VAT on Mess charges received towards supply of food to students and staff in the school premises of the said society in terms of the Act and also paid service tax on rent received towards Infra Lease rented by it in terms of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT:- The 1st respondent, being a quasi-judicial authority, is bound to assign reasons in support of its decision, and cannot simply reject the objections of petitioner to the levy proposed by him on these two items by merely saying that the explanation of petitioner is not ‘satisfactory’ - The 1st respondent is obligated to supply reasons for his conclusion and failure to do so amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned Assessment Order No.65175 dt.01.10.2020 passed by the 1st respond....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 577 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Principles of natural justice - Validity of Assessment Order - no personal hearing afforded to the petitioner prior to completion of assessment - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity of personal hearing prior to completion of assessment, the impugned order of assessment is set aside. The petitioner will appear before the respondent officer on Thursday, the 26th of November, 2020 at 10.30 a.m. without awaiting any further notice along with yet another copy of the documents relied upon by it in regard to its claim of ITC. Any material in relation to third party details obtained from the Departmental website and proposed to be relied upon by the authority shall be made available to the petitioner prior to completion of assessment. After consideration of the same and after hearing the petitioner in person, an order of assessment shall be passed de novo within a period of six (6) weeks thereafter. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (11) TMI 576 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reversal of ITC - the assessment are sought to be re-opened and the ITC availed by the dealers are directed to be reversed, when a mismatch occurs - Demand of Differential amount alongwith interest and penalty - HELD THAT:- A batch of Writ Petitions filed by similarly placed persons on this aspect of the matter came up for consideration before this Court in M/S. JKM GRAPHICS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [2017 (3) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where it was held that this Court is fully convinced that the procedure adopted by the respondent, Assessing Officers in all these cases are half baked attempts, which have not yielded results and these cases are before this Court or before the Appellate Authorities and all that the Assessing Officers can record is that they have issued show cause notices or passed order....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 553 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Principles of Natural Justice - sufficient opportunity to show cause against the re-assessment not provided - levy of tax on interstate stock transfer and sales made locally in other States, which cannot be subjected to levy of tax in the State of Karnataka - levy of tax on subsidy received by the petitioner from the Central Government - Nutrients Based Subsidy Scheme (NBS Scheme) - HELD THAT:- The essential premise for the petitioner’s case, apart from the question whether there could be levy of tax on subsidy granted to the petitioner based on the aforesaid two schemes, is whether there could be a levy on interstate stock transfer and sales made locally in other States. This question incontrovertibly has not been examined and it would be imperative for the authorities to consider the same as it relates to the very jurisdiction to ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 525 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Settlement of arrears outstanding - KGST Act - applicability of amnesty scheme - petitioner contends that the amnesty scheme is separately applicable to the various statutes mentioned therein and the petitioner cannot be compelled to opt for the amnesty under enactments other than the one he has chosen for settlement under the scheme - HELD THAT:- The statutory provision which deals with the amnesty scheme makes it applicable to outstanding dues under various statutes such as the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, Central Sales Tax Act, Tax on luxuries Act, Kerala Surcharges Act, Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act and the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. A perusal of the scheme, as also the circular relied on by the respondent, would also indicate that arrears under the various enactments are separately dealt with. For instance, in the case of dues....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 510 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Refund of amount deposited as pre-deposit - Proceedings under Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 - HELD THAT:- This petitioner preferred the refund application which is at Annexure P-5 to the memo of this writ petition. Thereafter, representations was also made before the Commissioner of State, GST, for refund (Annexure P-6). These refund applications have not been scrutinized and decided by the respondent, and therefore it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that suitable directions be given to concerned respondent-authority to decide the refund application in accordance with law, rules and regulations within a time bound schedule, and make the required payment along with statutory interest. Respondent no. 2 is directed to decide the application for refund of the amount along with statutory interest, which is at Annexure P-5 to the memo of this writ petition, in accordance with law - petition disposed off.
- 2020 (11) TMI 509 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Refund of Input Tax Credit - amount to be carried forward by way of TRAN-1 Return - HELD THAT:- This petitioner has preferred the writ petition for directions to the respondent to pay ₹ 3,14,284/- for the input tax credit alongwith interest under Section 38 of Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. There is also alternative prayer for allowing the aforesaid amount i.e. ₹ 3,14,284/- to be carried forward by way of TRAN-1 Return. The concerned respondents-authorities are directed to decide the application of this petitioner for refund of input tax credit for ₹ 3,14,284/- in accordance with law, rules, regulations and government policies applicable to the facts of the case. The respondent authorities will also keep in mind the decision rendered in W.P, if applicable, and will also keep in mind the alternative prayers in this writ petition. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (11) TMI 394 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Permission for withdrawal of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - TNVAT Act - HELD THAT:- When it is pointed out that the Petitioner has got an effective alternative remedy to prefer appeal against that order under Section 51 of TNVAT Act, within a period of 30 days from the date of its receipt before the jurisdictional Appellate Authority as mentioned in the note in the impugned order itself, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to resort to the aforesaid procedure. He has sent a confirmatory e-mail dated 06.10.2020 to that effect, which is placed on record. The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting such liberty.
- 2020 (11) TMI 393 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Rectification of mistake - error apparent on the face of record - application was dismissed on the short ground that the petitioner ought to have filed an appeal as permitted by this Court in the earlier round of litigation, and the application filed under Section 84, according to the Assessing Officer, was not maintainable - Whether the filing of Section 84 application by the petitioner despite being permitted to file an appeal in the earlier round of litigation is correct and permissible? - Principles of Natural Justice. Whether the filing of Section 84 application by the petitioner despite being permitted to file an appeal in the earlier round of litigation is correct and permissible? - HELD THAT:- There is no serious contest to the position that once a challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is rejected and the petiti....... + More