TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant's statement in its modification application before the Tribunal that it fulfils all the conditions for availing the exemption under Section 6 (3) of the DVAT Act, the judgment in Anand Decor (supra) would cover the case of the Appellant as well. Mr. Narayan added that the Respondent would be free to proceed in accordance with law against the Appellant in the event that the judgment of this Court in Anand Decor (supra) is reversed by the Supreme Court. - Court does not have to speculate what the outcome of the Respondent's SLP in the Supreme Court might be, as far as this Court is concerned, its judgment in Anand Decor (supra) would cover the case of the Appellant as well - Impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Appellant that the Appellant had sold vehicles worth ₹ 37,50,936 but had not deposited the corresponding tax @12.5% with interest. Accordingly, the VATO directed the Appellant to pay a sum of ₹ 6,50,553 and furnish the proof of such payment on or before 4th January 2010. A separate order imposing a penalty of ₹ 6,22,263 under Section 33 of the Act for the tax period 2006-07 was passed by the VATO on 3rd December 2009. 4. The Appellant filed an objection before the Objection Hearing Authority ('OHA') with a plea that since its essential activity was not sale of vehicles, and since such the sale was neither ancillary nor incidental to its main business , it was not liable to pay the VAT on such sale. The OHA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for examining the records pertaining to the sale of the vehicles and then assess the tax and penalty. 9. Meanwhile, the other Appellants whose appeals were dismissed by the Tribunal on 16th June 2014 filed appeals before this Court. By judgment dated 23rd December 2014 in ST APPL No.35 of 2014 (Anand Decor v. Commissioner of Trade Taxes), this Court set aside the judgment dated 16th June 2014 of the Tribunal and held that where the Assessees were not dealers or traders in motor vehicles but manufacturers or traders in other commodities, the sale of motor cars by such dealers would be exempted under Section 6(3) of the DVAT Act. 10. Since the Appellant had not filed an appeal before this Court, it filed a miscellaneous application be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
