C O M M O N O R D E R

The issue raised in all these writ petitions is one and the same. Hence, with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, all these writ petitions were taken up together and are disposed of by this common order.

2. For the assessment year 2014, 15 and 2016, 17 already return has been filed by the petitioner who is the a dealer under the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 ( In short 'the VAT Act' ).

3. Subsequently, proceedings under Section 27 was invoked where according to the Revenue, under Section 3 (4) (a) of the TNVAT Act, if the taxable turnover crosses the limit of Rs.50 Lakhs per year, the assessee has to file return in Form-I instead of Form-K, as the Form-K return has to be filed for availing the benefit of paying the compounded rate of tax if the turnover is less than Rs.50 Lakhs per year.

4. In this context, for instance, for the assessment year 2014, 15 the sales turnover was Rs.56,15,751/- according to the Revenue therefore, it exceeds Rs.50 Lakhs limit. Hence, the return filed by the petitioner dealer for the year 2014, 15 in Form-K for paying the compounded rate of tax i.e 1% of the total taxable turnover is not correct as the said benefit cannot be availed by the petitioner, if the turnover crosses Rs.50 Lakhs. Therefore on that ground the impugned order has been passed for paying the tax due and penalty under Section 27(3) of the Act has also been imposed. Challenging all those three similar orders, the present Writ Petitions are filed.

5. Heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned counsel for the petitioner who would submit that, insofar as the fixed rate of tax i.e compounded rate of tax at 1 % of the turnover is concerned, if it is Rs.50 Lakhs per year, then the petitioner dealer can avail the benefit and that benefit had been availed by the petitioner for all these three assessment years.

6. Assuming that if the total taxable turnover exceeds Rs.50 Lakhs as stated by the Revenue in the impugned order, even then the petitioner dealer is entitled to claim the benefit of paying compounded rate of tax at the rate of 1% of the taxable turnover for the first Rs.50 Lakhs and only for the reminder the rate of tax fixed by the Revenue under the provisions of the TNVAT Act can be paid. Therefore, the present calculation made by the Revenue for directing the petitioner dealer to pay the rate of tax for the whole taxable turnover i.e Rs.56,15,751/- in the first case and similar tax liability in respect of other two cases is against the provisions namely under Section 3 (4) (b). Therefore, on that ground, the impugned orders are vitiated and liable to be interfered with, she contended.

7. However, Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submits that insofar as clause (b) of sub-section(4) of Section 3 of the TANVAT Act is concerned, no doubt, it gives such a relief to the taxpayer i.e dealer to avail the benefit of paying 1% compounded rate of tax for the first Rs.50 Lakhs that too by way of insertion of the words called “Such dealer may pay tax for each year on his turnover relating to taxable goods upto rupees fifty lakhs at such rate not exceeding one percent as may be notified by the Government and is liable to pay tax under sub-section(2) on all his sales of taxable goods above rupees fifty lakhs” by amendment under the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act, 27 of 2011 which comes into effect from 01.04.2012.

8. However, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent point outs that the proviso to sub-clause(b) makes it clear that, such benefit can be availed by the dealer for one year and if such benefit is availed for a particular year, for subsequent years such benefits cannot be availed by the petitioner. Therefore, if at all the petitioner seeks for availing of such benefit under the said sub-clause (b) as amended from the year 2012 that benefit can be availed by the peti