Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (1) TMI 194 - KERALA HIGH COURTKVAT Act - Section 2(xxii) of the KVAT Act - Input Tax Credit - Whether a dealer, who is having turn over less than the taxable limit, does require the permission of the departmental authorities to collect tax - Whether the persons like the petitioner, who otherwise satisfy the definition of the term 'importer' under Section 2(xxii) of the KVAT Act, does require registration under the CST Act to be an 'importer' as defined thereunder – Registration u/s 7 – Assessee made only Inter-State purchases and not Inter-State sales - The petitioner had collected tax from customers and paid over to the revenue along with return, since the petitioner had made interstate purchase of goods for local sale, during the year Held that:- Both sub sections 1 and 2 of Section 7 do not give an idea that petitioner/ dealer is liable to take out registration under the CST Act. This is more so, when there is no case for the respondent that the petitioner has effected any Inter-State purchases, paying lesser rate of tax under the CST Act or that, the petitioner has effected any Inter-State sales. The petitioner is entitled to have the benefit of "Input Tax Credit", in so far as he happens to be an 'importer' as defined under Section 2(xxii) of the KVAT Act and there is absolutely nothing wrong for having collected and remitted the tax, without having any registration under the CST Act. In favour of assessee
|