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>High Court overturns assessment orders under TNVAT & CST Act for 2014-15 due to form submission refusal.</h1> <h3>M/s. Padmavathi Electricals rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Deepak Kumar Nahar Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Explanade Assessment Circle, Chennai</h3> The High Court set aside the assessment order and consequential orders under the TNVAT Act and CST Act for the assessment year 2014-15 due to the ... Seeking revision of the order - CST - Delay in submission of declaration forms in Form C, F, E I and E II subsequent to the orders passed - Held that:- a reading of Section 9(2) of the CST Act shows that it is exhaustive and clearly specifies that the Authorities under the State Law can exercise all or any of the functions under the State for assessment, review, revision, re-convey measures, etc., for the purpose of assessment and recovery of tax due under the Central Act. Therefore, the respondent has power to invoke Section 84 of the TNVAT Act and revise the assessment under the CST Act. - Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed, the impugned order dated 27.6.2016 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration. Issues:Challenge to assessment order and consequential orders under TNVAT Act and CST Act for the assessment year 2014-15 based on refusal to accept Form I declarations submitted belatedly.Analysis:The petitioner, a registered dealer under TNVAT Act and CST Act, challenged assessment order and consequential orders due to the respondent's refusal to accept belatedly submitted Form I declarations. The respondent cited Proviso to Section 8(4) of the CST Act and Rule 12(7) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration & Turnover) Rules, 1957, stating that declarations filed after assessment orders could not be considered for revision under Section 9(2) of the CST Act read with Section 84 of the TNVAT Act.The High Court referred to a decision in State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Arulmurugan, emphasizing the distinction between the provisions of the Act and the Rules regarding allowing further time for filing forms. It highlighted that the power to allow further time under the Act is broader compared to the Rules, with the authority having discretion to permit additional time without the assessee proving sufficient cause. The Court clarified that the authority should invoke the power defined in the Act rather than the Rules when an assessee seeks to file forms beyond assessment.The Court also considered a subsequent decision in Ultrust Solution (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CTO, where it was affirmed that the Authority can extend time to submit forms. It further analyzed Section 9(2) of the CST Act, noting that the Authorities under the State Law can exercise functions for assessment and recovery of tax due under the Central Act. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration, directing acceptance of Form I declarations and revision of orders under Section 9(2) of the CST Act read with Section 84 of the Act. No costs were awarded, and the writ petition was partly allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
