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

2018 (3) TMI 680

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he petitioner is not pursuant to the detection of any suppression by the Department, the mere apprehension that, on the petitioner being permitted to pay the differential tax, he might lay claim to the input tax credit of tax paid on purchases that were not reported, cannot, in my view, be a ground to deny the petitioner the opportunity to come forward and rectify an anomaly in the returns, so as to ensure a compliance with the statutory provisions. The petitioner in this case having established that he had approached the respondents, for correcting omissions in the returns filed by him for the assessment year 2011-12, before any proceedings were initiated against him for differential tax demands or for the imposition of any penalty for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mechanical application of procedural provisions in a Taxing Statute, without considering the purpose for which they were inserted in the Statute, does not augur well for the reputation of the tax man, whose attitude must change with the times, so that citizens see him more as a facilitator for tax compliance rather than a legally empowered money snatcher. 2. The petitioner in this writ petition is engaged in the trade of various items and is an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act [hereinafter referred to as the 'KVAT Act'] on the rolls of the 1st respondent. The petitioner filed annual returns for the year 2011- 2012 and duly paid the tax payable based on the returns filed. Subsequent to the filing of returns, the books .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. 5. The learned Government Pleader relies on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Venus Marketing v. State of Kerala - [(2011) 19 KTR 575 (Ker)] as also a decision of the Supreme Court in Jayam Co. v. Assistant Commissioner and Another - [(2016) 96 VST 1 (SC)] , to contend that the provisions regarding availment of concessions, under a Taxing Statute, have to be strictly construed, and they cannot be treated as rights conferred on assessees under the Statute, and further, when there is a suppression of facts by a dealer, concessions envisaged under the Taxing Statute should not normally be extended to the assessee. 6. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... evise returns within a period of two months from the last date of the return period to which the return relates. A proviso to the said Rule suggests that the Rule will not apply to a dealer against whom penal action is initiated for the same materials as necessitated the revision of the returns. The statutory provisions are silent, however, with regard to the course of action to be adopted in respect of a dealer, who has filed his returns and paid tax in accordance with the returns, and who, after completion of the self assessment to tax detects an omission in the returns that he had filed, and wishes to correct the said mistake and pay the correct tax due to the Government after revising his returns suitably. In my view, going by the objec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , his claim for input tax credit, of the tax paid in the immediate preceding transaction, cannot ordinarily be denied, and the limitation provisions in the Statute, that provide for taking of the credit or for revising returns so as to avail such credit, have to be construed liberally so as to enable the dealer to effectively comply with the provisions of the taxing Statute, and legitimately claim the benefits that he is entitled to. The petitioner in this case having established that he had approached the respondents, for correcting omissions in the returns filed by him for the assessment year 2011-12, before any proceedings were initiated against him for differential tax demands or for the imposition of any penalty for breach of any st .....

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