https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394097 Input tax credit under the TNVAT Act was discussed in the context of purchase mismatch noticed after audit under Section 65. The dealer relied on the statutory documents for claiming credit under Section 19(10)(a) and Rule 10(2), while Section 19(11) was invoked for entitlement and Section 19(16) was contended to make credit only provisional, not reversible merely because the selling dealer allegedly failed to remit tax. The Court also noted that, in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, it would not resolve disputed factual questions on credit entitlement. The impugned assessment orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:26:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394097 Input tax credit under the TNVAT Act was discussed in the context of purchase mismatch noticed after audit under Section 65. The dealer relied on the statutory documents for claiming credit under Section 19(10)(a) and Rule 10(2), while Section 19(11) was invoked for entitlement and Section 19(16) was contended to make credit only provisional, not reversible merely because the selling dealer allegedly failed to remit tax. The Court also noted that, in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, it would not resolve disputed factual questions on credit entitlement. The impugned assessment orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394097