TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (4) TMI 169
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TO R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MANOJ KUNJACHAN JUDGMENT Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned government pleader for the respondents. 2. Petitioner is a dealer under the KVAT Act. They commenced their business with effect from 8-5-2006 and applied for registration under the KVAT Act on 28-12-2006. They were also granted registration with effect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y. 3. As can be seen from the facts noticed above, the petitioner applied and obtained registration with effect from 28-12-2006. Going by the provisions of Section 15 of the Act, petitioner had the obligation to get registration under the Act and under Section 6, they also he had the liability to pay tax due under the Act. In so far as Section 15 B of the Act is concerned, it reads thus: &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ealers shall be liable to pay interest on all dues and will not be entitled for any refund relating to the period prior to filing of registration application". 4. A reading of the Section shows that notwithstanding the aforesaid provisions of the Act, dealers who had voluntarily applied for registration under the Act for the period from 15-12-2007 to 31-3-2008 would be entitled to claim input tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... effect from 1-4-2008, petitioner was registered dealer and hence is not one similarly situated to dealers who are eligible for the benefit of the section. Consequently, the petitioner cannot plead that they are similarly situated dealers and cannot complaint of discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. If that be so, the case of discrimination canvassed by the petitioner has ....