TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Payment Rule Upheld for Fast Track Assessments</h1> <h3>VIANI PAPERS Versus FAST TRACK TEAM, COMMERCIAL TAXES And THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL</h3> The court held that appeals against assessment orders completed under the Fast Track method under Section 17D of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act require ... - Issues involved: Interpretation of Section 17D of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act regarding the requirement of payment of entire tax amount for filing appeals against assessment orders completed under the Fast Track method.Summary:The petitioner, an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, filed returns for the assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05. Assessment for these years was completed under Section 17D of the Act, and the petitioner filed appeals against the assessment orders. The petitioner had not paid the disputed tax levied as per the assessment orders, leading to the Tribunal not registering the appeals. The writ petition sought to quash the assessment orders or direct the 2nd respondent to register the appeals.The petitioner argued that the requirement of payment of the entire tax amount under Section 17D(5) applies only to ex parte assessment orders, not to the assessment orders in question. However, the court held that Section 17D(5) mandates that appeals against assessment orders issued under the Fast Track method can only be filed if the dealer has paid the entire tax amount, without making a distinction for ex parte orders. The court emphasized that the statutory provision is clear and unambiguous, requiring payment of the entire tax amount for any appeal arising from an assessment under Section 17D.Despite the petitioner's reliance on the Budget Speech 2007 and Circular No. 17/07, the court found that these did not support the petitioner's case. As the petitioner had not paid the disputed tax estimated by the Fast Track Team, the requirement of Section 17D(5) remained unsatisfied, justifying the Tribunal's decision to decline entertaining the appeal. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
