9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itions, on the ground that, the issue involved in these writ petitions are squarely covered against the petitioner by the decision of the Division Bench in Silver Line Villas & Apartments Pvt. Ltd v. State of Kerala [2017 (2) KLT 770]. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the review petitioner that the facts in Silver Line Villas & Apartments cases referred in the judgment is entirely different and the facts in the writ petitions filed by the petitioner are distinguishable. It is stated that the Division Bench judgment was rendered in the context of a finding that, as against the requirement to declare all the works contracts that had to be assessed on compounded basis, the assessee in those cases had chosen not to declare all th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is, and observed as follows in paragraph 4 of the said judgment: "4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find that, the compounding scheme that is envisaged under Section 8(c)(1) of the Act is in the nature of a contract between the petitioner, on the one hand, and the Department on the other. The scheme works on the basis of a declaration submitted by the dealer, of his turnover for the assessment year in question, and his willingness to pay tax on the said turnover, at the concessional rate that is granted therein. The option of the dealer to pay tax on compounded basis, when accepted by the respondents, results in a binding contract between the dealer and the departme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er that was declared by the assessee for the purposes of exercise his option to pay tax on compounded basis. This, in my view, is erroneous and the assessing officer ought to have confined the application of the regular rate of tax under Section 6(1), to only such turnover as was not covered by the application for payment of tax on compounded basis. I am, therefore, of the view that Ext.P1 assessment order, to the extent it includes even the declared turnover of the assessee, in the turnover taken for the levy of tax at the higher rate under Section 6(1), is erroneous and the assessing officer ought to recompute the tax demand against the petitioner by taking note of the observations in this judgment. To enable the respondents to do so, I q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
