TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t such transaction is proposed to be brought under the taxable net element. When the petitioner has filed their monthly returns/furnishing particulars etc., in consonance with Section 19(10)(a) of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax and Rule 10(2) of Tamil Nadu Value Added Rules, 2007 claiming Input Tax Credit as per Section 19(11) of the said Act, the respondent ought not to have directed the petitioner t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the scheme of the Act and also on the ground that the issue raised in the petition is covered by the decision of this Court in Sri Vinayaga Agencies Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Vadapalani - I Assessment Circle, Chennai and another ((2013) 60 VST 283 (Madras)). 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner being a dealer registered on the file of the Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent ought not to have directed the petitioner to furnish the proof for payment of tax by the petitioner's seller for the purpose of allowing input tax credit. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of this Court in Sri Vinayaga Agencies Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Vadapalani - I Assessment Circle, Chennai and another ((2013) 60 VST 283 (Madra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rein 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 the TNVAT Act. That is availed of only by following rule 10(2). It is also not in dispute that the self-assessment has been made under Section 22(2) of the TNVAT Act and therefore the petitioner was justified in claiming the input tax credit. It is an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
