TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 25.05.2009, it is seen that there is no discussion as to how the penalty is leviable under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act. In the grounds of appeal, the revenue sought to sustain the penalty levied under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act. The Tribunal heard the appeal and came to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer wrongly invoked Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act instead of Section 27(4) of the TNVAT Act and Section 27(4) of the TNVAT Act being a machinery provision, it would operate automatically and the assessee is liable to pay penalty at 50% on the wrong claim of input tax credit in terms of Section 27(4)(i) of the TNVAT Act. After coming to such a conclusion, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer with a dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g beyond the grounds raised by the revenue before it. The tax case revision is allowed and the substantial questions of law are answered in favor of the assessee. - Tax Case (Revision) No.1 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 31-1-2019 - Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mr. Justice N. Sathish Kumar For the Petitioner : Mr.D.Vijayakumar For the Respondent : Mr.V.Haribabu Additional Government Pleader ORDER T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. This tax case revision filed by the assessee under Section 60(1) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) is directed against the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Chennai dated 13.08.2015 in STA.No.90/2010 for the assessment year 2006-07. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... determining the total and taxable turnover. On the very same day, the assessee filed revised return wherein they made a clam for input tax credit of ₹ 25,86,928/- for the period from January 2007 to March 2007 as against ₹ 18,60,521/- claimed originally in the monthly returns. The Assessing Officer by order dated 25.05.2009 rejected the claim under Section 19(11) of the TNVAT Act as the assessee had filed the claim beyond the time limit prescribed. The Assessing Officer went one step further and levied penalty under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act. On reading of the assessment order dated 25.05.2009, it is seen that there is no discussion as to how the penalty is leviable under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act. The assessee filed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 27(4) of the TNVAT Act would stand attracted. We say so for more than one reason. Firstly, the appeal filed by the revenue was not on the said ground, the only to assist the penalty under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act. Consequently, the Tribunal ought to have considered the vital fact that for Section 27(4) of the TNVAT Act to stand attracted the assessee's case revision brought under Section 27(2) of the TNVAT Act. In otherwords, the Tribunal should record a finding that there has been wrongful availment of ITC or the assessee has produced false bills, vouchers, declaration certificate or any other document with a view to support his claim of input tax credit. So far as the first aspect is concerned, the assessee filed a revised re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
