C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Sasi – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer – Respondent
Challenge in this Writ Petition is against Ext.P6 notice issued under S.66(3) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). Through the said notice, the 1st respondent had intimated the petitioner about proposal to revise Ext.P5 permission already granted under S.8(b) read with R.11(2)(i) of the KVAT Act and Rules. The petitioner is running a Granite crushing industrial unit and he is a registered dealer under the provisions of the KVAT Act. The petitioner opted for compounding under S.8
(b) of the Act and application submitted in this regard in Form-1D evidenced from Ext.P1 was allowed as per Ext.P5 proceedings issued in Form-4DA, fixing compounded tax payable for the year 2009-10 as Rs.25,250/- which includes tax amount of Rs.25,000/- and cess of Rs.250/-. The said amount was permitted to be remitted in quarterly installments of Rs.6,313/- each. In Ext.P6 notice it is mentioned that on a subsequent verification of records and on enquiry conducted by the 1st respondent, it is noticed that there was mistake in fixing compounding rate and the same ought to have been fixed at Rs.1,50,000/-, in view of the provisions contained in the Finance Act, 2009. Being a mistake
Commissioner of Sales Tax (U.P) v. Indra Industries (122 (2001) STC 100).
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.