Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Franke Faber India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner Trade & Taxes, Delhi

2016 (12) TMI 192 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Whether the Sales Tax Tribunal fell into error in upholding the re-assessment under Section 24 of the DVAT Act, 2004 given the nature of previous order in relation to proceedings initiated under Section 49 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 by the Assessee? - Held that:- it is quite evident that Tribunal’s earlier observation with regard to classification based on the material before it was conclusive. Apparently, the revenue accepted it. What was remitted after the decision of the Tribunal which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssue. Thus, it is evident that the STO virtually reviewed the decision of the Commissioner under Section 49 which, merged with the order of the Tribunal, as it were, based on no new material much less any significant material which could have permitted an authority to validly reopen assessment under Section 24. - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST. APPL. 4/2016 - Dated:- 28-11-2016 - S. Ravindra Bhat And Najmi Waziri, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Adv For 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

issioner under Section 49. The question was whether the goods and articles sold by it, i.e., Cooker Hoods/Kitchen Chimneys were classifiable as electrical or electronic air purifiers under Entry 2(d) of the First Schedule to the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975. The assessee/appellant had contended that it sold two types of appliances; one used a ducting mode whereby air passed through without removing the impurity from the air sucked; the second variety of goods sold by it interalia sucked out air and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the second article as an air purifier was incorrect and approached the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal which rejected its appeal. Consequent upon the determination, the assessment was completed. 3. The appellant approached the first Appellate Authority which by an order remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer to verify and consider the eligibility of the appellant for grant of benefit based upon the statutory forms and declarations. In the course of the remanded proceedings, the Assessing Of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vis-a-vis the Cooking Hoods that entailed circulation of purified air, as well as the decision on the Hoods that used the ducting mode, the STO could not have virtually taken a fresh opinion. 5. The learned counsel relied upon the text of Section 24 in the decision of this Court in Shruti Fasteners v. Commissioner of Value Added Tax (CVAT) 2015 SCC Online Del 12952 and Hoshyar Singh Suresh Chandra Sarees Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Sales Tax, New Delhi and Another (2004) 136 S.T.C 173 (Delhi). 6. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rom the determination under Section 49 by the Commissioner to submit that to say that unlike Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act which are premised upon the existence of independent material of facts pointing to non declaration or misrepresentation by an assessee, Section 24 of the Act, in this case, permits revisiting of the questions provided there is some factual foundation. It was urged that even though the matter was remitted on the limited ground, there is nothing in law which prohibited .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sses any fresh material justifying re-assessment under Section 24. In Hoshyar Singh Suresh Chandra Sarees Pvt. Ltd. (supra) this Court had stated as follows: 44. We are also of the opinion that in the instant (sic) case there was no fresh material with the assessing officer that there was no information with the assessing officer nor is there anything to show that the assessee concealed some material from the assessing officer so as to enable him to reopen the case. In view of the law which we h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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