https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300610 A notice under section 46 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was upheld where the authority had prima facie material and recorded reasons suggesting excess input tax credit carried forward by the dealer. The Court found that the existence of material indicating excess credit and the call for an explanation were sufficient at the notice stage, and section 22(6) did not negate that power. The ejusdem generis argument did not displace the statutory basis for issuance. The notice was therefore not vitiated by lack of jurisdiction or perversity, and the writ challenge failed. en-us Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:29:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300610 A notice under section 46 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was upheld where the authority had prima facie material and recorded reasons suggesting excess input tax credit carried forward by the dealer. The Court found that the existence of material indicating excess credit and the call for an explanation were sufficient at the notice stage, and section 22(6) did not negate that power. The ejusdem generis argument did not displace the statutory basis for issuance. The notice was therefore not vitiated by lack of jurisdiction or perversity, and the writ challenge failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300610