TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vision notices and the orders under challenge fairly state that the petitioner-dealer had paid tax to the dealer. It is, therefore, for the department to proceed against the selling dealer for recovery of tax in the manner known to law. The provision under which the present action has been initiated, namely invoking sub-section (16) of Section 19, does not appear to be correct on the admitted facts as above. All the revision orders revising the input tax credit on the admitted case of tax having been paid to the selling dealer, therefore, are found to be totally incorrect, erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the TNVAT Act and Rules. As a result, all the orders are liable to be set aside. - W.P.Nos.2036 to 2038 of 2013 - - - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aler at Palayamkottai Assessment Circle, namely, M/s Classic Enterprises, had not filed the monthly returns in Form-I and also not paid the tax to the department for the relevant period. Therefore, while accepting that the petitioner-dealer had paid the tax to the selling dealer, pre-revision notices were issued on 7.12.2012 in respect of each assessment year contending that input tax credit should be reversed on the failure of selling dealer in paying tax. The petitioner filed their detailed objections to the pre-revision notices stating that at the time of self-assessment under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (for short, the TNVAT Act ), all the records relevant for claiming the input tax credit have been filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch in fact has already been paid by us to seller which fact has also been admitted by you in the above said notice. Further we also pray to drop the proposal to reverse the ITC which has been correctly availed by us and also to drop the proposal to levy penalty. We also request you to make proper enquiries at the Palayamkottai assessment circle to ascertain whether the said M/s Classic Enterprises has remitted the tax and has filed the returns for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 and also request you to cross examine the seller namely M/s Classic Enterprises in order to ascertain the true state of affairs. 4. Overruling these objections, the Assistant Commissioner (CT), Vadapalani-I Assessment Circle, relying upon Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealer at this end, law states that it has to be reversed as per the provision contained in Section 19(16) of TNVAT Act. Reliance is placed on Section 19(16) as well to say that the input tax credit availed by the petitioner-registered dealer is provisional and the authority is empowered to revoke the same if it is found to be incorrect, incomplete or otherwise not in order. 5. The learned Government Advocate for the respondents states that Section 19(16) covers the contingency as is found in the present case and hence the orders of the authority are justified. 6. This Court is not inclined to accept any of the contentions raised in the impugned proceedings or the plea taken by the learned Government Advocate for the respondents, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (e) The description of the goods; (f) The quantity or volume of the goods; (g) The value of the goods; (h) The rate and amount of tax charged; and (i) The total value of the goods. Therefore, it cannot be said that input tax credit was wrongly availed. 7. The provision of Section 19(1) clearly states that input tax credit can be claimed by the registered dealer, provided if the registered dealer establishes that the tax due on such purchase has been paid by him in the manner prescribed. The pre-revision notices and the orders clearly state in paragraph-3 that the petitioner herein had paid the tax to the selling dealer. If that be the case, the petitioner's case squarely falls under the proviso to Section 19(1) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
