9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1035X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, (KVAT Act for short). It would appear that, for the assessment years 2015-2016 and 2016-17, the petitioner applied for payment of tax on compounded basis, by taking the view that the ice cream that was manufactured and sold by it, was an item of cooked food which was one of the items in respect of which an assessee could discharge tax on compounded basis under Section 8 of the KVAT Act. Accordingly, the petitioner preferred an application dated 22.04.2015 for the assessment year 2015-16 and a similar application dated 30.04.2016 for the assessment year 2016-17, before the respondent. For the year 2015-16, there was no response from the department intimating the petitioner of the acceptance or rejection of the application submitted for pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the KVAT Act, when they had not expressly rejected the application preferred by the petitioner for payment of tax on compounded basis, within the time contemplated under the Statute, and further, had permitted the petitioner to pay tax on compounded basis without any objections at the appropriate time. In WP(C) 23157 of 2017, Ext.P22 order of the respondent, subjecting the petitioner to tax under Section 25 (1) in accordance with the regular provisions for payment of tax, under Section 6 of the KVAT Act, for the 4th quarter of the assessment year 2016-17, is impugned on the same line of reasoning as stated above in connection with WP(C) 12649 of 2017. 3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ejection of an application submitted by an assessee for payment of tax on compounded basis, at the fag end of the assessment year, in respect of which the compounding application was preferred? In my view, when the statutory provisions detailing the procedure to be followed by an assessee, for the purpose of payment of tax on compounded basis, contemplate the consideration, by the department, of an application preferred by an assessee, and an intimation to be given to the assessee as to whether or not his application was accepted, for the purposes of enabling the assessee to discharge his liability on compounded basis, the respondent cannot, by a delayed action on its part, prevent an assessee from discharging the liability on compounded ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the KVAT Act, I am of the view that the assessment orders impugned in these writ petitions cannot be legally sustained. The delayed action on the part of the respondent would, under the circumstances, amount to a mere change of opinion by the assessing officer and, it is trite, that in exercise of powers under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act, a change of opinion by an assessing officer cannot be the basis of a reassessment against the assessee. I therefore, quash Exts.P16 to P19 orders in WP(C) 12649 of 2017 and Ext.P22 of WP(C) 23157 of 2017 with consequential reliefs to the petitioner. 6. Before parting with these cases, it would be apposite to observe that the facts in these writ petitions present quite a disturbing picture with regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
