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

2017 (1) TMI 744

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... actions which have to be proved by the Assessee company as the sales taking place outside the State of Karnataka. This Court advisedly would not make any comment on the evidence so far produced by the Assessing Company and non recording of separate detailed findings by the Assessing Authority in the impugned order, as would appear from the quoted portion of the order as stated above, so that the interest of either of the parties is not adversely affected. The petitioner-assessing company not only has the remedy by way of filing an appeal against the impugned assessment order, but, if the assessing company is of the opinion that there are factual errors in the impugned order, and such mistake of facts is apparent on the face of the impug .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent of ₹ 95,34,92,290/-, out of total sales of ₹ 421.72 crores and it was claimed by the petitioner-assessee that such sales were made to various customers by its manufacturing/sales units situated outside the State of Karnataka in the States like Andhra Pradesh, Gujarath, Jharkand, Orissa, Tamilnadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal and these goods never entered State of Karnataka. 4. The relevant portion of the impugned order to the aforesaid claim and the reasons for denial of such exemption is quoted below for ready reference:- 3. LSOK(Local Sales Outside Karnataka) The dealer company has effected local sale outside Karnataka (LSOK) and declared as Exempted sales in the returns and in Form VAT-240 for the FY 2010-1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RTH CHENNAI-UNIT-I 58929630 TNEB-NORTH CHENNAI-UNIT-II 9957278 TOTAL 190641216 UTTAR PRADESH UPR VUNL-ANPARA 93061926 TOTAL 93061926 WEST BENGAL DVC-AHP MEJIA UNIT 1 2 1153846 DVC-DURGAPUR-TPS-AHP 18571116 TOTAL 19724962 GRAND TOTAL 953492290 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ter, from the entire turn over which in the present year was to the extent of ₹ 421 crores approximately, the exemption is claimed to the extent of sales made outside the State of Karnataka, which was to the extent of ₹ 95.34 crores in the present year and such exemption was being allowed by the Assessing Authority in the previous Assessment years, even after coming into force of the KVAT Act, 2003, but for the present assessment period in question, the Assessing Authority refused that exemption even though the relevant details, audit reports and documents were furnished before him during the course of the assessment proceedings and he also submitted that no specific proposition notice was given to the assessee for denying such .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in other States, other than Karnataka, were proved by the petitioner-assessee and therefore, the imposition of tax on the petitioner-assessee in the present case by denying such exemption was justified. He also drew the attention of the Court towards the prescribed Form VAT-100 and VAT-240 and relevant Rules framed under the Rules of KVAT Act, 2003 namely, Rule No.34(3) and Rule 138 of KAVT Act Rules, 2005 and he submitted that the assessee has voluntarily disclosed its entire turnover in its returns filed here and therefore, for claiming the exemption in respect of the sales made outside the State of Karnataka, it ought to have proved each such transaction properly that such sales was really taking place outside the State of Karnataka, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... way of filing the appropriate Rectification application under the provisions of Section 69 of the Act. 10. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner- assessing company urged before the Court that since the filing of the appeal would require certain pre-deposits to be made by the petitioner-company to maintain such appeal on merits, the petitioner-company which is a loss making public sector undertaking may be permitted that instead of filing the appeal, it would file the Rectification application under Section 69 of the Act and the respondent-Assessing Authority may be directed to pass the appropriate speaking order on such Rectification application within the stipulated time frame, as the petitioner-company would be unable to depos .....

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