|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 698 Records
-
2009 (10) TMI 879 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
As per section 2(1)(b) of the Act, 'arrears' relate to tax, penalty and interest for which assessment has been made prior to April 1, 2002 and pending collection on the date of filing of application. If the applicant went on appeal against the entire demand and if the appeal resulted in 'remand' subsequently, i.e., after April 1, 2002, after fresh assessment is made, whether the dealers are eligible under the scheme? - Held that: - When the entire assessment had been set aside on appeal or revision even though the assessment had been made prior to April 1, 2002 it becomes non est since any fresh assessment made and demands raised thereupon subsequently after April 1, 2002 would not be eligible to be covered under this scheme - petition allowed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 878 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Constitutional validity of sub-section (5A) of section 14 of the Act 15 of 1963 as amended by the Kerala Finance Bill, 2004 questioned
Held that:- The Division Bench of this court, while sustaining section 14(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act prescribing fees for registration at different levels, on the basis of the turnover (the maximum of which was ₹ 10,000 in 1993 and ₹ 20,000 in 1996), had only observed that there was no rationale in demanding the very same extent of fees for the purpose of renewal also, to be done on yearwise basis and it was accordingly, that sub-section (5) as it existed earlier for collecting such amount was set aside as unreasonable and unconstitutional. Unlike this, the position as it stands now, it only such that the fees payable for renewal, under sub-section (5A) in respect of Kerala general sales tax registration is ₹ 500; whereas in the case of dealers having "Kerala general sales tax and Central sales tax " registration, it is ₹ 1,500. This court does not find it as exorbitant, arbitrary or shockingly disproportionate to the extent of service being provided in connection with the steps for renewal of registration and as such, no interference is called for.
With regard to the maintainability of the writ petition, even though it has been stated in the opening paragraph of the writ petition that the same has been preferred in a "representative capacity " (for and on behalf of more than 800 dealers enlisted in exhibit P2), absolutely no document has been produced before this court to show that the petitioners have been authorised by all such persons to file the proceedings on their behalf as well. Merits having already been answered against the petitioners, the writ petition fails
-
2009 (10) TMI 877 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Rectification application - Held that:- The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that it was a case of mistake is also not correct for the simple reason that if the authority assuming wrongly or incorrectly proceeded to determine the tax liability of the petitioner-dealer in terms of the provisions of section 8(2)(a) of the Act and though Sri Kamath, the learned counsel for the petitioner, would vehemently urge that it was a clear case to which provisions of section 8(2)(b) of the Act apply that was not the subjectmatter for rectification, but is only subject-matter for appeal or revision and such an error of law could not have been sought for being rectified in an application under section 25A of the Act.
Thus we have no doubt in our mind that section 5 or section 14 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked in respect of the application filed beyond the period of five years invoking the jurisdiction under section 25A of the Act. Appeal dismissed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 876 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Constitutional validity of section 17D of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 challenged - Held that:- We are of the view that the provision under sub-section (5) of section 17D providing for remittance of full assessed tax for filing appeal is perfectly tenable. We see no merit in the challenge against the validity of section 17D of the Act, which as already held by us is beneficial provision. Therefore, we uphold the constitutional validity of section 17D.
Since in all these cases assessments are completed by issuing pre-assessment notice by individual officers, we feel that the procedure contemplated and stated by us above is not strictly followed and so much so, orders passed cannot be sustained under the provisions of section 17D. We, therefore, allow the writ appeals and writ petitions in part by vacating the impugned assessment orders, but with direction to the assessment team to complete the assessment afresh under section 17D within a period of three months from date of receipt of copy of this judgment, after issuing notice to all parties and after hearing their objections
-
2009 (10) TMI 875 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Levy of penalty under section 16(2)(d) of the TNGST Act - imposition of penalty by a separate order - the assessment based on the book turnover - Held that: - reliance was placed in the decision in the case of The Deputy Commissioner (C. T.), Coimbatore Versus VSR. Ramaswami Chettiar and Bros. [1975 (8) TMI 114 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], where it was held that under section 16(2) of the Act, the assessing authority has no jurisdiction to impose penalty by a separate and independent order - petition allowed - decided in favor of assessee.
-
2009 (10) TMI 874 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Reassessment orders - Whether the rate of tax originally charged was proper and as the declarations were supplied to him by the purchasing dealer, he was obliged to accept the said declarations?
Held that:- In the present case, undisputedly the goods were supplied by the petitioner and he had charged the concessional rate of tax in view of the declaration supplied by the purchasing dealer. If that be so then the original assessment made by the assessing authority was absolutely justified and the assessment could not be reopened on the basis of an audit objection. The approach of the authority that particular items are not included in the entry, therefore, the concessional rate would not be applicable, could not be used as a handle against the petitioner for reopening of the assessment.
For the reasons aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the orders of reassessment passed by the assessing officer and confirmed by the revisional authority are bad. The said orders deserve to be and are accordingly quashed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 873 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Whether the Tribunal was justified in declining the concessional rate claimed by the petitioner at four per cent for the work executed for KSE Board under notification S.R.O. No. 1091/99?
Held that:- What is clear from the provision contained in the contract is that the parties have agreed that the work executed is a works contract mentioned in the KGST Act and the contract is loaded with tax component in full and it is for the contractor to pay the actual tax for the works contract. In other words, the purchaser for whose benefit concessional rate is provided under notification has not claimed the concessional rate. The beneficiary has not claimed because the contract does not provide payment of tax at concessional rate which means that full rate of tax is loaded in contract amount. We therefore hold that the petitioner's claim is neither bona fide nor tenable. Consequently, we uphold the order of the Tribunal confirming the assessment and dismiss the S.T. Revision cases.
-
2009 (10) TMI 872 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in treating the turnover representing loading charges, transport charges, unloading charges of fly ash as not includible in the purchase turnover for the purpose of levy of tax under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959?
Held that:- As it is quite natural and legal that the sale comes to an end the moment the sale price is paid by the dealer to the thermal power station and the delivery is accepted by the dealer at that point of time ex-site itself. Therefore, whatever expenses which the dealer incurs thereafter for the purpose of drying and then transporting to his place is quite natural and it can only be post-sale expenditure and at no stretch of imagination, it could be concluded or arrived at as pre-sale expenditure. When this question of fact, which has been clearly upheld by both the appellate authorities concerned, we have no hesitation in accepting the question of fact and there is no need to make our interference with the finding of fact.
As decided in Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing and Weaving Co. Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1980 (9) TMI 262 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] the transport charges, which was incurred by the assessee, in respect of delivery of goods from the Forest Department, would not attract levy of charges under section 7A.In favour of the assessee and against the State.
-
2009 (10) TMI 871 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Whether the materials supplied by the petitioner to the Chief Engineer, Power and Electricity Department during the year 2008 shall not be subjected to assessment for payment of VAT?
Held that:- Liability of the petitioner is to be ascertained from the facts that the supply orders were placed at the registered office of the writ petitioner at Guwahati (Assam) and the goods were manufactured and supplied from the factory at Barapani (Meghalaya) to Aizawl. This is evident from annexure I, the invoice, annexed at with the affidavit of the respondents. Neither is there any averment in the affidavit of the respondents that the writ petitioner had any office in the State of Mizoram nor is there any evidence that the goods were actually purchased by the writ petitioner from any dealer in the State of Mizoram and then supplied it to the respondents to take a view that it was an intra-State sale or purchase.
On the other hand, the facts of this case clearly show that it was out and out an inter-State transaction and the writ petitioner is not liable to pay VAT under MVAT Act, 2005. W.P. allowed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 870 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Tax levied on sale of used beer and liquor bottles - Validity of the assessment orders - Held that:- While input tax credit is to be allowed to a dealer for the tax charged in respect of purchase of taxable goods, if such goods are used in his business, no input tax credit can either be allowed on purchase of goods specified in the Sixth Schedule or with respect to the goods detailed in rule 20(2). As a result, "liquor, bottled and packed under the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act" is not entitled for input tax credit. Such goods are, however, not liable to tax on its second and subsequent sale within the State of Andhra Pradesh. These limitations/exemptions apply as long as liquor continues to remain packed in bottles as specified under the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act. Once liquor is removed from its container, i.e., bottles, neither "liquor" nor "empty bottles" constitute goods falling under item 1 of the Sixth Schedule to the Act. No provision has been brought to our notice whereby a VAT dealer is disentitled from availing of the benefit of input tax credit on sale of packing material, including empty bottles, even when he fulfils the conditions prescribed under the Act and the Rules made thereunder.
Levy of tax on sale of empty bottles at four per cent, under section 4(3) read with item 90 of the Fourth Schedule, is, therefore, valid. The writ petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 869 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s. Kaytee Switch Gear Limited, together with interest at 15 per cent per annum and also the penalty. The respondents are only entitled to retain the input tax at four per cent and consequent interest on delayed payment, penalty and are liable to refund the excess input tax together with interest as per section 50 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with rule 128 of the Rules. The respondents are not entitled to retain the interest collected from the seller on the refunded input tax. For the reasons stated above, the following ORDER (i) Writ petitions are hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned endorsements dated March 30, 2009 and May 20, 2009 are hereby quashed. (iii) The respondents are hereby directed to calculate and pay the interest on refunded input tax as per section 50 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with rule 128 of the Rules as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
-
2009 (10) TMI 868 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Levy of tax under section 7A on the purchase turnover of edible oil(i.e., covered under the conditional exemption at the time of purchase) - Held that:- In view of the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and as there is no serious objection raised by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, the petitioner is permitted to file its objections before the respondent, with regard to the impugned notice, dated July 30, 2007, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the said objections, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law.
-
2009 (10) TMI 867 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Incomplete or incorrect information furnished in the return furnished for the period 2005-06 onwards - locking the Tax Identification Number - Held that:- None of the grounds conferring power under rule 51A of the Rules are available nor it could be shown at the time of hearing that the dealer had failed to pay any tax, penalty or interest payable under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 or has failed to furnish a return or annual statement by the prescribed date or has filed incomplete or incorrect return, etc.
Therefore, the continuation of locking TIN is absolutely unwarranted and the grounds given in the show-cause notice does not exist on record. Therefore, we are of the view that the continuation of locking of TIN is not germane to the grounds available under rule 51A of the Rules and, therefore, the action of the respondents cannot be sustained. This petition succeeds. The respondents are directed to open the TIN of the petitioner immediately.
-
2009 (10) TMI 866 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Interest under section 24(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 demanded for assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97
Held that:- Suppose a dealer was assessed to tax in the first instance and he also makes payment of the tax so assessed. But later on, if the tax assessed is found to be in excess, the refund of the excess amount is to be made within 90 days, failing which the Government is also liable to pay interest to the dealer, by virtue of section 24(4). Though the interest payable by the dealer under section 24(3) is higher than the interest payable by the Government under section 24(4), the choice is with the dealer, either to make full payment and claim refund under section 24(4) or to make part payment and run the risk of being imposed with a penal interest under section 24(3). W.P. dismissed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 865 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Release of vehicles and goods detained by respondent No. 2 on the intervening night of 3/4 September, 2009 demanded as the petitioners have already furnished the bank guarantees and cash securities as demanded by respondent No. 2, Excise and Taxation Officer (Mobile Wing), Chandigarh and who has passed the release orders also.
Held that:- The present petition lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed. No doubt, the petitioners have furnished the requisite bank guarantee and cash securities under the provisions of the VAT Act. However, in view of registration of an FIR No. 363 dated September 8, 2009 (annexure P/4) against the petitioners, before the release of the goods detained under the provisions of the VAT Act, the release order dated September 8, 2009 (annexure P/3) passed by respondent No. 2 will only facilitate the petitioners to get their vehicles released under the provisions of VAT Act but will not help the petitioners to get their vehicles released for committing alleged offences under sections 420/465/467/468/471 and 120B IPC as that is a separate cause of action and the only remedy available to the petitioners is to get their vehicles released under the provisions of section 451 of the Cr. P.C. Since the vehicles and the goods are case property in the aforesaid FIR, the appropriate remedy for the petitioners would be to move an application before the appropriate court to seek release of the vehicles/goods on superdari and it would not be appropriate for this court to order release of the goods in the present petition filed under articles 226/227 of the Constitution.
-
2009 (10) TMI 864 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Whether the respondent had wrongly levied the higher rate of tax on the food and drinks items sold by the petitioner on the misconception that they are branded items?
Whether the respondent had wrongly levied the higher rate of tax on the food and drinks items sold by the petitioner on the misconception that they are branded items?
Held that:- In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondent and on a perusal of the records available, this court is of the considered view that the impugned proceedings of the respondent cannot be sustained in the eye of law. It is clear that section 3D of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, as it stood prior to the amendment, which came into effect, from April 1, 2002, there was no distinction between branded and unbranded food and drinks.
As such, sales tax was levied on the food and drinks sold by the petitioner, at two per cent, in accordance with the unamended section 3D of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. Since the assessment years of 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02, relate to the period prior to the amendment of section 3D, it would not be open to the respondent to levy sales tax at the higher rate of 16 per cent. Also the respondent had erred in relying on the Clarification No. 156 of 2003, in D. Dis. Acts Cell II/31073/2003/dated June 26, 2003 in proposing to impose the higher rate of tax on the food and drinks sold by the petitioner. Appeal allowed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 863 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... etitions are disposed of permitting the petitioner to file necessary applications under regulation 9(2) within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of the applications from the petitioner, the Tribunal shall entertain the same without insisting upon the original order accompanying the applications. However, if the records of the Tribunal discloses that the original order was served on the petitioner, the petitioner shall also file condone delay applications. If the records of the Tribunal do not show the service of the copy of the order of the Tribunal on the petitioner, the Tribunal shall entertain the applications for setting aside the ex parte orders even without the condone delay applications. If the petitioner files the application under regulation 9(2) along with condone delay petitions, the condone delay petitions may be considered sympathetically by the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 862 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned Sales Tax Tribunal is justified to conclude that the assessee has no dealing on pure silk sarees merely because such pure silk sarees costs ₹ 250 per piece during that period and thereby annulling the assessment made for the year 1986-87 under section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 which is contrary to the facts admitted by the assessee?
Held that:- The reference made by the Tribunal and for that matter the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the Revenue in the revision are pure question of facts and they are not mixed questions of fact and law. The reference is discharged and for that matter the revision is dismissed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 861 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... gainst the impugned proceedings, invoking section 52 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. On preferring an appeal by the petitioner to the appellate authority, as provided under the said provision, the appellate authority is to consider the interim order passed by the Principal Bench of the Madras High Court, dated February 16, 2008, made in M.P. No. 2 of 2008, in W.P. No. 4042 of 2008, and pass appropriate orders thereon, with regard to the tax at four per cent, instead of at 12.5 per cent on the goods sold by the petitionerassessee. However, with regard to the other aspects of the impugned order, the appellate authority is to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to prefer the appeal, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 860 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Best judgment assessment - Held that:- We opine that the assessee may be otherwise liable to pay the tax as quantified and determined by the revisional authority. The tax as quantified and determined by the revisional authority if has not yet got time-barred and the appellant was liable to pay this amount by way of tax to the State and the respondents are serious about ensuring that, definitely they can do that; in fact it is their duty but that can be achieved only if the respondents, the officials of the Commercial Tax Department take care to follow the statutory provisions at least now and not to act in a negligent and careless manner as had been done hitherto.
We are also surprised about the manner in which the Additional Commissioner has chosen to exercise his revisional powers to set aside the order of the appellate authority which was undoubtedly a correct order for the reason of the original authority not having jurisdiction to pass the best judgment assessment order.
............
|
