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>Margin trading profit in turnover under Kerala VAT Act requires Tribunal reconsideration. Circular importance highlighted.</h1> <h3>M/s. ALUKKAS JEWELLERY KANNUR Versus STATE OF KERALA</h3> M/s. ALUKKAS JEWELLERY KANNUR Versus STATE OF KERALA - TMI Issues:1. Inclusion of margin trading profit in turnover under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003.Analysis:The judgment pertains to a dealer registered under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, challenging an order of the Kerala Value Added Tax/Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the inclusion of margin trading profit in turnover. The dealer argued that the margin trading profit should not be considered as constituting sale/turnover under the KVAT Act. The dealer's contention was based on the premise that the profit or loss from margin trading arises due to the cancellation of contracts and does not meet the definition of 'sales' or 'turnover' under the Act. However, the Tribunal did not accept these arguments, leading to the revision before the High Court.The petitioner emphasized that the circumstances were undisputed, and the interpretation of Sections 2(xliii) and 2(lii) of the KVAT Act was crucial. The petitioner relied on a clarification order issued by the Commissioner of Taxes, stating that margin trading profit should not be included in turnover as it does not constitute a sale. The petitioner sought to set aside the Tribunal's order based on this circular and reverse the inclusion of turnover.On the other hand, the Senior Government Pleader contended that the circular was not presented before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal's decision should be final based on the facts and principles applied. It was suggested that the Tribunal should reconsider the issue in light of the circular and that the case could be remitted for further examination.The High Court, in its judgment, decided that the matter required reconsideration by the Tribunal, specifically taking into account the circular dated 06.10.2016. The Court refrained from independently analyzing the dealer's circumstances and the application of relevant sections of the Act. The Tribunal's order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, with a directive to dispose of the case within six months. Both parties were granted the liberty to present any circulars or materials supporting their respective cases. Ultimately, the revision was allowed as per the directions provided by the Court.
TaxTMI 