1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Output Tax Adjustment with Input Credit Disallowed under West Bengal VAT Act; HC Upholds Tribunal's Decision</h1> The Calcutta HC upheld the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal's decision, ruling that the adjustment of output tax demand with forwarded input tax credit is ... Challenge to appellate order by which assessment order was confirmed - whether the petitioner was right in his contention that the output tax demand for the period during which the eligibility certificate was not renewed or rejected, namely, 4.3.2015 to 31.3.2015 could be adjusted with the forwarded accumulated input tax credit? - HELD THAT:- The learned tribunal had rightly took into consideration the provisions of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act and found that the rejection of the renewal of the eligibility certificate will render the petitioner/dealer ineligibility for output tax for discharging the liability the dealer will have to pay the taxes. However, the claim of the petitioner/dealer to adjust the carry forward input tax which was carried forward to the subsequent quarter is not feasible as there is no such provision under the Act. Conclusion - The learned tribunal was perfectly right in holding that the output liability for the rejected period, namely, from 4.3.2015 to 31.3.2015 was to be paid by the writ petitioner within 30 days of such rejection in terms of Rule 180 of the said Rules and having not done so, the authorities were justified in demanding the same by passing the impugned order. The petitioner has not made out any case for interference with the order passed by the learned tribunal - Petition dismissed. The Calcutta High Court upheld the decision of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal regarding the adjustment of output tax demand with forwarded input tax credit. The Court found that there is no provision under the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act for such adjustment, and upheld the tribunal's ruling that the dealer must pay the output tax liability for the rejected period. The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any grounds for challenging the tribunal's decision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
