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>Interpretation of Tax Act Section 19(2) in High Court - Stay granted, appeals consolidated</h1> <h3>THE STATE OF TAMILNADU Versus M/s. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD.</h3> The High Court of Madras heard arguments regarding the interpretation of Section 19(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, specifically its ... Interpretation of Statute - Section 19(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - whether proviso to Section 19(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, applies both to the registered dealers and manufacturers? - Held that: - if the request of the assessees/manufacturers is conceded, the revenue involved would be above ₹ 1000 Crores - we deem it fit to admit the writ appeal and grant interim stay of the impugned judgment - appeal admitted. Issues: Correct interpretation of Section 19(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 regarding its applicability to manufacturers and registered dealers.In the judgment delivered by the High Court of Madras, the core challenge was the correctness of the interpretation of Section 19(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The Court had to determine whether this section applied to manufacturers or only to registered dealers. The Court heard arguments from the learned Advocate General, who highlighted the provisions and reasoning of the writ Court. The Advocate General pointed out that several writ petitions were pending due to the impugned order, with demands for refunds of Input Tax Credit (ITC) being made by the assessees/manufacturers. It was emphasized that granting the requests of the assessees/manufacturers could involve a significant revenue of over Rs. 1000 Crores.In response to the importance of the issue and being satisfied with the submissions of the Advocate General, the Court directed the cause papers to be served on the respondent. Recognizing the gravity of the matter, the Court decided to admit the writ appeal and granted an interim stay on the impugned judgment. The Court also instructed the Special Government Pleader (Tax) to expedite the admission of all appeals and to consolidate all related writ petitions to avoid redundancy and multiple proceedings. The case was scheduled for further proceedings on 10.11.2017.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
