Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited Versus The State of Karnataka and Others

2016 (4) TMI 921 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Entitlement for input tax rebate - Section 10(3) of the KVAT Act - Purchases effected from local registered dealers - Held that:- Since the petitioner was entitled for adjustment of excess tax paid in view of the said notice issued, the petitioner made adjustments of the excess taxes paid for the aforesaid tax periods against the output tax payable from the month of August 2014 in the monthly returns submitted in Form VAT 100 under the KVAT Act before the third respondent. Subsequently, the seco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

]. The second respondent had issued notice under the provisions of Section 41(1) proposing to rectify the reassessment order rejecting the input tax credit allowed earlier to the petitioner.

Re-opening of proceedings - Re-assessment order was prejudicial to the interest of revenue - Held that:- there is no authority or jurisdiction in the second respondent in seeking to reopen the proceedings on the basis of the said judgment. If at all, it is the revisional authority who may be vest .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6 OF 2015 AND 4480-4489 - Dated:- 8-2-2016 - MR. ANAND BYRAREDDY, J. For The Petitoner : Shri K.J.Kamath, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S.V.Girikumar, Additional Government Advocate The petition coming on for preliminary hearing, is considered for final disposal in the facts of the case. The learned Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and a dealer registered under the Karnataka Value Added Ta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the tax periods 2008-09 to 2011-12, the petitioner claims to be entitled for input tax rebate on the purchases effected from the local registered dealers, who had issued valid tax invoices for the sales made and the tax paid at the time of purchase of the vehicles was entitled for rebate against the output tax payable under the provisions of Section 10(3) of the KVAT Act. The excess of input tax credit over the output tax payable for a particular tax period was also eligible to be adjusted or c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the KVAT Act, the refund was to be claimed as per Section 10(5) or which was to be carried forward for adjustment or refund in the subsequent tax periods. This is a circumstance which arises only in the case of lease transactions undertaken by the petitioner. Owing to this peculiarity of lease transactions and for want of complete understanding of the provisions of the KVAT Act, the petitioner thought that the output tax on the lease rentals being very less when compared to the input tax on p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Input tax restrictions : (a) Input tax shall not be deducted in calculating the net tax payable, in respect of.- (1) xxxxxxx (2) tax paid on goods as specified in the Fifth Schedule subject to such conditions as may be specified, purchased and put to use for purposes other than for.- (i) resale; or (ii) manufacture or any other purpose of other goods for sale." 3. As per the above provision, in respect of goods specified under Schedule V to the KVAT Act, the input tax may not be claimed unt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ss premises of the petitioner was inspected by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and in the course of inspection, the Enforcement Authority made certain observations with respect to the transactions made by the petitioner, and had forwarded a report to the regular jurisdictional audit authority of the petitioner, namely the second respondent, which was not to the knowledge of the petitioner. Pursuant to it, the second respondent is said to have initiated re-assessment proceedings a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tioner. Since the petitioner was entitled for adjustment of excess tax paid in view of the said notice issued, the petitioner made adjustments of the excess taxes paid for the aforesaid tax periods against the output tax payable from the month of August 2014 in the monthly returns submitted in Form VAT 100 under the KVAT Act before the third respondent. Subsequently, the second respondent had observed that the allowance of input tax in the re-assessment orders as per the actual input tax claimed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version