TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when compliance under Section 62(5) was made. Therefore, the appellant was liable to comply with the provisions of Section 62(5) of the Act. Since the appellant failed to deposit 25% amount of the additional demand of the tax and interest only as directed by the DETC(A) and the Tribunal, the Tribunal had rightly dismissed the appeal on that account. In the present case, the appellant was required to pre-deposit 25% amount of the additional demand of the tax and interest only as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeal, which was reasonable and justified - No illegality or perversity could be pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant in the findings recorded by the Tribunal which may warrant interference by this Court. N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces of the case, the Assessing Authority was justified in reversing Input Tax Credit on retention of bye products by the Rice Millers under Rule 21(6) of Punjab VAT Rules, 2005? 2. A few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The appellant procured the paddy from the farmers and give the same to the rice millers for milling. As per the agreement entered between the appellant and the rice miller, out of the total paddy, 67% of the shelled rice was to be supplied back to the appellant. The bye products, i.e., rice husk, rice bran, broken rice etc. were to be retained by the rice miller. The appellant filed all its quarterly returns as well as Annual return for the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the order of the DETC(A) was to remain intact. Hence, the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee for noncompliance of Section 62(5) of the Act whereby the appellant was required to deposit 25% of the additional demand of tax and interest only and granting two months' time to do so. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we do not find any merit in the appeal. 5. For the assessment year 2011-12, the Assessing Authority vide order dated 15.9.2015 (Annexure A-1) raised a demand of ₹ 15,38,51,832/- along with interest and penalty. The appeal against the said assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y, finding no merit in the instant appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. 8. A prayer was made by the learned counsel for the appellant to grant some time for pre-deposit. However, in the interest of justice, we grant two months' time from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order to the appellant to make pre-deposit of the amount as directed by the Tribunal. It is directed that in case the appellant deposits 25% amount of the additional demand of the tax and interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, the appeal shall be heard by the first Appellate Authority on merits in accordance with law. 9. CM-12068-CII-2018 has been filed under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
