https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413836 Under the Karnataka VAT scheme, liquor became taxable for CL-9 licence holders operating in urban areas from 01.03.2014, and input tax credit was available only where tax had actually been borne on purchases. Because the assessee bought liquor from an exempt dealer, no input tax arose in its hands, so Section 10 could not support credit. Rule 3(2)(f) was confined to deductions linked to the dealer's own exempt sales, not to a supplier's exemption. The statutory machinery for net tax computation was therefore sufficient, and the value-added theory could not displace the requirement of actual input tax. en-us Thu, 02 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2021 08:30:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413836 Under the Karnataka VAT scheme, liquor became taxable for CL-9 licence holders operating in urban areas from 01.03.2014, and input tax credit was available only where tax had actually been borne on purchases. Because the assessee bought liquor from an exempt dealer, no input tax arose in its hands, so Section 10 could not support credit. Rule 3(2)(f) was confined to deductions linked to the dealer's own exempt sales, not to a supplier's exemption. The statutory machinery for net tax computation was therefore sufficient, and the value-added theory could not displace the requirement of actual input tax. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 02 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413836