Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2016 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (9) TMI 1159 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxDemand of input tax rebate - cancellation of refund of input tax credit - Section 47(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2002 - edible oil - whether demand of input tax credit refunded earlier justified? - Held that: - the proper course in construing revenue Acts is to give a fair and reasonable construction to their language without leaning to one side or the other but keeping in mind that no tax can be imposed without words clearly showing an intention to lay the burden and that equitable construction of the words is not permissible. It is equally well settled legal proposition that consideration of hardship, injustice or anomalies do not play any useful role in construing taxing statutes unless there is some real ambiguity and the regard must be had to strict letter of law. The notice must mention the grounds on which the action is proposed to be taken and if the notice mentions one ground but the action has been taken on some other ground, the same would amount to violation of principle of natural justice. The impugned order dated 10.1.2012 cannot be sustained in the eye of law, as from perusal of the notice, Annexure P/4, dated 20.11.2009, it is found that the order has been passed on the grounds de hors the grounds mentioned in the notice dated 20.11.2009. In other words, the impugned order has been passed in violation of principle of natural justice. On perusal of the proviso to Section 14(3) of the Act, it is evident that the words "from the close of relevant financial year" are used instead of the words "subsequent years". In the instant case, the refund of the amount of input tax rebate relates to the assessment year 2006-2007. The assessment was made in respect of the aforesaid year by an order dated 28.4.2009, i.e., from the close of relevant financial year. Therefore, the assessing authority has rightly awarded the refund of input tax rebate to the petitioner to which he was entitled as the case of the petitioner is squarely covered in view of proviso to section 14(3) of the Act. Demand of input tax credit not sustainable - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
|