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>Court clarifies VAT Act provisions on invisible loss verification, emphasizing compliance and procedural fairness.</h1> <h3>M/s. Ellak Chem Industries Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Authorised Signatory K.G. Jothis Kumar Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Harur Assessment Circle, Harur, Dharmapuri District</h3> M/s. Ellak Chem Industries Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Authorised Signatory K.G. Jothis Kumar Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Harur Assessment Circle, ... Issues involved:1. Interpretation of provisions related to invisible loss in VAT Act.2. Assessment of refund claims under Section 18(2) of the Act.3. Validity of assessing authority's use of uniform percentage for invisible loss.4. Procedure for assessing officer to follow in cases of refund claims.Analysis:1. The judgment dealt with the interpretation of provisions concerning invisible loss in the VAT Act. The Court referred to a previous decision where it was emphasized that a dealer claiming refund under Section 18(2) must demonstrate that the claim is not restricted by any conditions in Section 19 of the Act. The assessing authority is required to conduct a fact-finding exercise to determine the loss of goods purchased against manufactured goods and ensure compliance with Section 19 restrictions, particularly Section 19(9).2. The Court held that it is insufficient for a dealer to merely show payment of input tax on purchased goods used in manufacturing. The assessing officer must verify the representation made by the dealer to ensure it complies with the Act's provisions. The judgment emphasized the importance of examining the quantum of loss and the restrictions under Section 19 before granting any refund under Section 18(2) of the Act.3. The Court specifically addressed the issue of the assessing authorities using a uniform percentage for invisible loss and directing dealers to reverse input-tax credit based on this percentage. It was held that such a practice is not justified. The judgment set aside all orders based on ad hoc percentages and granted liberty to the assessing officer to issue appropriate show-cause notices to dealers before revising or reversing any refund, ensuring procedural fairness and compliance with the law.4. Finally, the Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter to the assessing officer for fresh proceedings in line with the directions provided in the judgment. The decision highlighted the importance of following due process and conducting a thorough assessment before granting or reversing any refunds under the VAT Act. No costs were awarded in this matter, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
TaxTMI 