Back
A. K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, EASWARAN S.
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Joint Commissioner Of State (Law), Department Of Kerala Goods And Service Tax, Ernakulam – Appellant
Versus
Jolly Eapen, M/s. Jolly Food Products – Respondent
ORDER :
Easwaran S., J.
This O.T. Revision is preferred by the State aggrieved by the order of the Kerala Value Added Tax/Agriculture Income Tax and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Thiruvananthapuram in T.A.(V.A.T.) No.306 of 2016 dated 20.4.2022.
2. The facts in brief for disposal of the revision are as follows:
The assessee is a registered dealer of bakery products. The annual return submitted by the assessee for the assessment year 2010-2011 was interfered by the assessing authority, pointing out that there was turnover suppression detected by the intelligence officer and purchase variation. Accordingly, the assessment was completed as per order dated 22.1.2015 demanding additional tax and interest. Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the assessee filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). By order dated 13.7.2016, the appellate authority modified the order of assessment in relation to the addition towards probable omission, rate of tax and credit of tax paid. However, the assessee, aggrieved by the order, approached the appellate tribunal by preferring the appeal. Before the tribunal, it was contended by the assessee that the inspection conducted in
The tribunal has the authority to apply Section 25AA of the KVAT Act in ongoing appeals, emphasizing the need for independent verification by the assessing authority.
Permission was not granted to the petitioner to file revised return, since, according to the assessing authority, there was a clear detection of pattern of suppression and proceedings under Section 2....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the Commissioner's exercise of revisional powers under Section 58 of the KVAT Act and the principles governing input tax credit and....
The court established that amendments to the KVAT Act's limitation provisions are prospective and do not apply retroactively to past assessments.
Point of law : VAT - Assessments are already been completed, hence Section 25AA of the Act cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner.
Suo motu revisions under the KVAT Act cannot proceed while an appeal on the same issue is pending, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions.
The Tribunal's enhancement of turnover without compliance to rules and lack of evidence for sales suppression were not justified.
THE ESTIMATION OF TURNOVERS ON THE BASIS OF CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY IS ONLY ONE OF THE PERMISSIBLE MODES AND THAT TOO WHEN THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE AND ONLY ON SHOWING THERE IS ANY DIRECT NEXUS ....
The tribunal erred in exonerating the dealer from liability without addressing the concurrent findings of suppression by the assessing and appellate authorities.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
