TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the KGST Act. Since, in the instant case, the petitioner had paid the entire tax due as per the return, the liability of penal interest under Section 23 (3) of the KGST Act could not be fastened on it going by the decision of the Supreme Court in Maruti Wires's case (2001 (3) TMI 856 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA). Interest under Section 23 (3A) of the KGST Act also would not apply to the petitioner for the assessment year in question namely 1996-1997. The provisions of Section 23 (3A) where introduced in the KGST Act only from 1998 and did not contemplate a retrospective operation for an anterior period. This being the case, the levy of interest on Section 23 (3A) would not apply in respect of a demand of tax pertaining to assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k place pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court on the issue of inclusion of rubber cess in the purchase turn over, the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 1996-1997 was completed by including the rubber cess in the purchase turnover for the purposes of assessment. Thus, the petitioner become liable to pay additional amounts, by way of tax, on completion of the assessment. By Ext.P1 assessment order, this additional tax amount was demanded from the petitioner. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer also proceeded to levy penal interest under Section 23(3) of the KGST Act on the differential tax amount. Ext.P1 assessment order, as already noted is impugned in the writ petition, to the extent it demands penal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 410] wherein the Supreme Court found that the liability of a dealer under the KGST Act to pay sales tax can arise either by way of self assessment on the return of turnover being filed or else on the order of assessment being made. The failure to file return of taxable turnover could render the dealer liable for any other consequence or penal action as provided in law but could not attract the liability of penal interest under Section 23(3) of the Act. In this case, it is not in dispute that while filing the return, without including the amount of cess on rubber purchased in the turnover, the petitioner had paid tax on the turnover that was declared by it in the return. Thereafter, it was only while completing the assessment by Ext.P1 orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
