Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 46 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTInput Tax Credit - petitioner has not fully complied with the requirements of Sub-Rule (1) and Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 38 of the Rules of 2006. - HELD THAT:- The claim of input tax credit by a registered dealer is required to be examined taking into consideration not only Section 18 of the Act of 2003 providing for input tax credit, but also other provisions contained in the Act of 2003 as also the Rules framed under the Act of 2003. While Section 18 of the Act of 2003 provides for input tax credit, Section 72 of the Act of 2003 read with Rule 38 of the Rules of 2006 provides contingencies when input tax credit may not be allowed. On the face of clear provision contained in Rule 38, Sub-Rule (3) of the Rules of 2006, the claim of input tax credit, which is otherwise available under Section 18 of the Act of 2003, may be disallowed as the mandate of law is clear that unless the dealer makes full compliance of Sub-Rule (1) and Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 38 of the Rules of 2006, input tax credit shall not be allowed. The provisions contained in Section 18 of the Act of 2003, Rule 18 of the Rules of 2006 as also Section 72 of the Act of 2003 and Rule 38 of the Rules of 2006 had to be read conjointly and not in isolated manner. It is petitioner’s own admission and undisputed fact that various cash transactions were made and the authorities found that invoices in respect of various transactions were not issued - there are no ground to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our revisional jurisdiction under Section 84 of the Act of 2003. Revision petition dismissed.
|