2011 (3) TMI 1544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ader took notice and offered to argue the matter on merits. Accordingly we heard both sides and proceed to dispose of the revisions by this common judgment. The petitioner is a dealer in coffee and pepper filing monthly returns and remitting tax thereon under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act", for short). While the tax payable for February, 2009, was Rs. 99,648, the tax payable for March, 2009, was Rs. 1,14,241. The cheques given along with monthly returns towards payment of tax were dishonoured. However, strangely the assessing officer took nearly seven to eight months to notice the dishonour of cheques and consequent non-recovery of tax. The same is revealed from the fact that notice was issued to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x to the Government and he has no authority to divert collected tax for any other purpose. However, if for any unforeseen reason the cheques got dishonoured, it was the duty of the petitioner to have intimated the officer and arrange funds at the earliest to honour the cheques. What we notice is that the fault or lethargy is more on the part of the Departmental Officer than on the part of the assessee. This is because the assessing officer before whom the cheques are presented for payment does not bother to take any action for at least 6 months after the dishonour of cheques. In our view, the lapses on the part of the officer are not to be taken lightly. So far as a dealer is concerned, what we find is the low rate of interest for default o....