TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 421
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unal has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the appellant and has confirmed the orders passed by the Assessing Officer as well as First Appellate Authority denying the input tax credit(partially), the appellant - purchaser - dealer has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed questions of law. "A. Whether Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal (respondent no.3) has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by not appreciating the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Suresh Trading Co.? B. Whether Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by affirming the order of the First Appellate Tribunal (respondent no.2 herein), who ignored to take int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pex Court delivered in case of State of Maharashtra vs. Suresh Trading Co.?" 2. That the appellantpurchaser - dealer claimed input tax credit on the alleged purchased made by it worth Rs. 42,46,800/- from one M/s. Leela Trading and three others dealers and claimed input tax credit of Rs. 1,69,872/- during the assessment year 2007-08. That on appreciation of evidence on record as well as considering the fact that the vendors from whom the appellant as alleged to have purchased the goods on which input tax credit was claimed and their registrations were canceled, the AO held that appellant has failed to prove the actual purchase of the goods from the aforesaid vendors and as such there was actual moment of the goods at all on which the input....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....questions of law. 3. Shri J.F. Mehta, learned advocate for the appellant has vehemently submitted that all the authorities below have materially erred in denying the input tax credit to the appellant on the purchase of goods worth Rs. 42,46,800/-. It is submitted that the AO denied the input tax credit of the appellant on the ground that the registration of the vendors came to be canceled. It is submitted that on the aforesaid ground, the input tax credit on the purchase made by the appellant, cannot be denied. It is submitted that as such on cross check of the records it was found that the appellant was having the stock which was reflected in the books of account etc. It is submitted that even invoices with respect to the purchase of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d not be applicable to the present case. 5. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties at length and perused the order passed by the learned Assessing Office; order passed by the learned First Appellate Authority and impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the appellant claimed the input tax credit of Rs. 1,69,872/- on the purchase of the goods worth Rs. 42,46,800/- from M/s. Leela Trading company and other three vendors. In support of the above claim that they actually purchase the goods worth Rs. 42,46,800/- from M/s. Leela Trading Company and other three vendors, the appellant relied upon the invoices / bills and their books of profit and loss. However, it is....