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 directs revisional authority to assess excess amount claimed, adjust against pre-requisite payment. No coercive action allowed.</h1> <h3>M/s. KMC Construction Ltd. Versus State Of Tripura and Ors</h3> M/s. KMC Construction Ltd. Versus State Of Tripura and Ors - TMI Issues:Petition to quash notice of demand and prohibit further action based on it. Interpretation of Section 70(2) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 regarding pre-requisite money deposit for revision petition.Analysis:The petitioner, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, sought to quash a notice of demand dated 15.05.2020 and prevent the respondents from acting on it. The petitioner filed a revision petition under Section 70 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 against an assessment order for the years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The petitioner also filed a separate petition to stay the operation of the assessment order during the pendency of the revisional petition.The Revisional Authority had not passed any order or fixed a hearing date, prompting the petitioner to seek interim protection from the assessment order. The Advocate General presented an order from the revisional authority recognizing the revision petition but noting the non-deposit of necessary money as required under Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act. The revisional authority allowed the petitioner an opportunity to make the required deposit and set a date for further consideration.The petitioner claimed to have already paid an excess amount, which was not considered by the revisional authority in its initial order. The court directed the revisional authority to assess the claimed excess amount and adjust it against the pre-requisite payment as per Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act. Until the date set for further consideration, no coercive action was to be taken against the petitioner based on the assessment order. Additionally, a direction to deduct the assessed tax and penalty from the petitioner's bill was suspended pending the revision petition's decision.The court disposed of the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to seek further legal recourse if aggrieved by the revisional authority's order. The petitioner was granted permission to file an application detailing the excess amount paid for adjustment against the requisite payment under Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act. A copy of the order from the revisional authority was taken into record, and copies of the court's order were to be supplied to the parties' counsel.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
