9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 999X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1963 after the closure of the relevant assessment year. We have heard the Government Pleader for the State and the counsel appearing for the respondents. The facts leading to the controversy are the following: The respondent is running a bar hotel. During 2008-09 he was liable to pay turnover tax on liquor at 10 per cent under the KGST Act and was also liable to pay tax on sale of cooked food at four per cent under the KVAT Act. Both the KGST and the KVAT Acts, respectively, provide for compounding facility for payment of tax on liquor and cooked food, respectively. The respondent obviously had to file applications for compounding before separate authorities under both the statutes. Under the compounding scheme provided under section 7(1)( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by him. The respondent filed appeal against this order before the appellate authority. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal by relying on the judgment of this court reported in Annie George v. State of Kerala [2009] 20 VST 796 (Ker). However, on second appeal, the Tribunal allowed it by condoning the delay in filing application for compounding and directed assessment at compounded rate on the liquor sales turnover. It is against this order, the revision is filed by the State. After hearing both sides, we are unable to sustain the order of the Tribunal for more than one reason. In the first place, under the scheme of compounding, the application has to be filed on due date and orders should be passed thereon to entitle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... les assessee availed of the facility under the KVAT Act by making application at least at the fag end of the year. In fact the application was submitted with delay of an year, i.e., on May 18, 2009. We do not know on what basis the Tribunal could accept the grounds stated by the respondent in support of the delay condonation petition, assuming that delay could be condoned even beyond the year for which the application was submitted. We therefore, allow this sales tax revision by setting aside the orders of the Tribunal and by restoring the first appellate authority's order rejecting the delay condonation application and compounding application. However, we make it clear that the respondent will be free to pursue the appeals filed agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
