9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The present petitions are directed against the order dated 30.09.2015 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal for the sake of convenience), whereby the Tribunal for the reasons recorded in the order has allowed the claim of the assessee in capacity of a purchaser dealer for extending the benefit of input tax credit. 3. We may record that the State has preferred the petitions by raising following questions of law which read as under: a) Whether the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal is right in the facts and circumstances of the case in allowing the Appeals filed by the Respondents? b) Whether the KAT is right in case law not granting relief even though the Respondent Assessee has not proved the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es; 5) Cheque payments realization in the name of the 'Firms name' captioned as beneficiary name; 6) Bank certificates certifying that the payments have been realized by the selling dealers towards the sales effected to the appellant; 7) e-sugams issued by the selling dealers for the transportation of the goods; 8) Form VAT-100s of the selling dealers acknowledged by the respective LVOs; 9) Reflection of tax invoices in the Form VAT-100s submitted by the selling dealers before the respective LVOs; 10) Payment of tax in case of M/s. Rajhans Metals for the tax period of July 2012 amounting to Rs. 3,778/- by cheque payment mode and reference number, date and the bank on which the cheque has been issued 11) Payment of tax in case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examined by the Tribunal. 9. We do not find that the matter can be stretched to that extent as sought to be canvassed. Once the purchaser dealer-assessee satisfactorily demonstrates that while purchasing goods, he has paid the amount of VAT to the selling dealer, the matter should end so far as his entitlement to the claim input tax credit. If the selling dealer has not deposited the amount in full or a part thereof, it would be for the Revenue to proceed against the selling dealer. But thereby the benefit of input tax credit cannot be deprived to the purchaser dealer. 10. Since the petitions are meritless and are to be dismissed, even if delay is condoned, there will not be any adverse effect to the respondent. Hence the delay is condon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
