2013 (8) TMI 340

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red in this regard has been negated issuing Ext.P6 and P8 notices, pointing out that the petitioner is liable to satisfy the tax liability, in respect of subsequent return period with interest and penalty, which are under challenge. 2. The sequence of events is as follows. The petitioner, in the course of the business, purchased various commodities from outside the State of Kerala satisfying the 'Entry Tax' payable under Section 12 of the KVAT Act at the check post. By virtue of the mandate under Section 12 (2) of the KVAT Act, the petitioner is entitled to have the said payment of tax, to be adjusted against the 'output tax' actually payable by him. Sec 11(6) enable the assessee to carry forward the excess input tax in respect of the re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e 'next assessment year', without confining the same to the 'next return period' within the same assessment year, is quite wrong and mis conceived. With reference to the statutory provisions, it is said that the action pursued by the petitioner is perfectly within the four walls of the law. It is also pointed out in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner admittedly has not filed any refund applications. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no basis for placing reliance on the proviso to section 11(6) and that there is no bar under the statute to give adjustment of the excess input tax of March 2006 to be adjusted against the tax liability of the next return period, i.e. April 200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nly request of the petitioner was to adjust the excess payment in respect of 'March 2006', against the amount payable in respect of 'April 2006', which was liable to be entertained by virtue of mandate under Section 11(6), as the statute does not say in so many words, that the benefit contemplated therein will stand confined to the particular assessment year. It is also stated that, scope of the proviso to Section 11(6) is only to enable the party concerned to have refund; which in no case shall place a bar on the way of the petitioner in claiming the benefit under Section 11(6). 8. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents fairly concedes that the averment in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner ad....