New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (5) TMI 1189 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

2016 (5) TMI 1189 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT - [2016] 92 VST 448 (P&H) - Demand of purchase tax - Input tax credit disallowed - Whether the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the judgment of M/s Gobind Sugar Mills and following the judgment of M/s Jagatjit Sugar Mills case despite the fact that the issue and facts in Govind Sugar Mills case are almost identical to the issues and facts of the present case and whether the appellant is liable to pay tax on the purchase of sugarcane under the 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

MAR MITTAL AND MRS. RAJ RAHUL GARG, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. M.R. Sharma, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This order shall dispose of two appeals bearing VATAP Nos. 6 and 7 of 2016 as according to the learned counsel for the appellant, the issue involved therein is identical. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from VATAP No. 6 of 2016. 2. An application bearing CM No. 1832-CII of 2016 has been filed under Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure for condonation of delay in payment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

arh (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in Appeal No. 11 of 2015, for the assessment year 2011-12. claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case the orders (Annexure A-1), (Annexure A-2) and (Annexure A-3) are legally sustainable in law? (ii) Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the VAT Tribunal Punjab Chandigarh has grossly erred in upholding the order of the Notified Authority Cum Excise and Taxa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d in denying the input tax credit on the purchase tax assessed/paid by the appellant as per order of assessment (Annexure A-1)? 4. Put shortly, the relevant facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The appellant is running a sugar mill and is engaged in the business of procurement of sugar cane (Schedule 'H' goods) directly from the farmer and consumed the same for the manufacturing of sugar and its by product. It is having TIN No. 034210 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 27,59,33,761/- being the Statutory Minimum Price fixed by the Government of India for the year under consideration and ₹ 15,65,54,227/- paid by the appellant on the directions of the State of Punjab. The assessee had not taken ₹ 15,65,54,227/- into consideration for calculating and depositing purchase tax. Besides this, the Assessing Authority although levied purchase tax on sugarcane yet did not allow the Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the purchase tax as per Section 19(5) of the Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 6. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant that the issue involved in these appeals stands concluded against the appellant by this Court in VATAP No. 176 of 2013 (M/s AB Sugars Ltd. v. State of Punjab and another) decided on 15.7.2015. The following substantial questions of law were considered by this Court therein:- i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in ignoring the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch is a special Act? Answering the said substantial questions against the assessee, it was held as under :- 10. We, therefore, cannot take a view different from the one taken by the Supreme Court in M/s Jagatjit Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Punjab (supra) on the ground that the Supreme Court did not consider the provisions of the Punjab Sugarcane (Regulation of Purchase and Supply) Act, 1953. Nor we are entitled to ignore this judgment on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Gob .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

garcane (Regulation of Purchase and Supply) Act, 1953 or that there were no difference between the two enactments. Section 49(8) of the Sugarcane Act which fell for consideration in Gobind Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Bihar (supra) expressly provides that a part of the amount of purchase tax collected under subsection (3) is to be utilized for the purpose of the Board and the Council as grant but did not indicate that the entirety of this collection was solely earmarked for the purpose of expend .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erned with the supply of sugarcane to sugar factories: moreover in view of lean financial position of the State, the State Government are not in a position to provide adequate funds for extensive Cane Development work in the areas supplying cane to sugar factories with the result that the factories are not getting cane of good quality. The Bill is being introduced in order to provide for a rational distribution of sugarcane to factories for its development on organized scientific lines making ad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version