Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (12) TMI 309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n from the payment of purchase tax. In other words, the unit is entitled to exemption from the payment of sales tax only on the sale of goods manufactured by it and any purchase tax leviable was recoverable from the said unit. Thus, the Tribunal was right in holding that the notional tax liability calculated for the purposes of setting off against the tax exemption limit shall be the amount of tax payable on the sale of furnished products under the Local Sales Tax Law and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 which does not include purchase tax and, therefore, the amount of purchase tax levied was recoverable from the appellant. - No illegality or perversity could be demonstrated in the aforesaid findings recorded by the Tribunal which may call f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ld be made to suffer for the fault of the counsel who without of the knowledge of the dealer and for reasons best known to him did not press the said issue at the final arguments before the Tribunal? (iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the benefit given under Rule 28B covers purchase tax liability? (v) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order Annexure A-3 so far as it decides the purchase tax issue relied upon contradictory findings? 4. A few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of rubber footwears. The assessee was granted tax benefit under Rule 28B of the Haryana Gene .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ered by the decision of this Court in Jai Hanuman Stone Crushing Mills, Bhiwani v. The State of Haryana and others (2014) 47 PHT 172 (P H), wherein this Court while disposing of the matter held that the petitioner therein is entitled to produce the tax invoices, Forms VAT C-4 and Forms VAT D-1 before the Assessing Authority who thereafter has to determine the tax liability by deciding the matter by passing a fresh order in accordance with law. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to produce the STD-IV declaration and ST-14B Forms before the Assessing Authority who shall thereafter examine the tax liability and decide the matter by passing a fresh order, in accordance with law. 8. Adverting to issue No. (ii), Rule 28B(3) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x during the year 2000- 01 and as per the interpretation of law, vide K.K. Spinners' case decided on 21.7.22000, reported in (2000) 16 PHT 265, which held the field at the relevant time, though purchase tax was leviable yet it was not recoverable and was to be adjusted against the tax exemption limit, so the revising authority could not have demanded the purchase tax from the company as per the law. The learned State representative had defended the impugned order on this issue stating that the correct position at law finally is that the purchase tax leviable is recoverable from an exempted unit as held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in M/s Aggarwal Rice General Mills vs. The State of Haryana and others C.W.P. No. 15133 of 2006 d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the unit, whichever is earlier. It is also evident from these provisions that tax exemption is to be computed in terms of NSTL and NSTL does not include purchase tax. So any purchase tax leviable is recoverable. We may further observe that the case of K.K. Spinners (supra) was not cited before the revising authority and finally the law on the issue supports his view. Therefore, his decision on the point is not per incuriam. In the light of the above discussion, we hold on this point that the amount of purchase tax levied is recoverable from the company and the impugned order is correct to this extent. 9. No illegality or perversity could be demonstrated in the aforesaid findings recorded by the Tribunal which may call for interfe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates