AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 182
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the parties are agreed that the issue involved in all the appeals is identical. However, the facts are being extracted from VAT Appeal No.37 of 2014. 3. VAT Appeal No.37 of 2014 has been preferred by the assessee-appellant under Section 36 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short, "the HVAT Act") against the orders dated 26.3.2007, 30.6.2008, 7.6.2012 and 27.8.2013, Annexures A.1, A.2, A.4 and A.7 respectively rejecting appeals in STA Nos.584-585 of 2008-09 for the assessment year 2003-04, claiming following substantial questions of law:- i) Whether the Haryana Tax Tribunal, passing the order Annexure A.7, was right in rejecting the appeal only on one issue that too without deciding anything it being an apex fact finding authority? ii)Whether in the facts and circumstances whether the authorities below did not pass contradictory order when the assessing authority writes record produced but disallowed claim as if no document produced the appellate authority entertained such documents though rejected the same, and further Tribunal passed orders against itself and then finally without going into the record it being an apex fact finding authority rejec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant failed to produce original purchase invoices and VAT C4 certificates before the respondent during the assessment proceedings. The invoices in possession of the appellant did not have its name, TIN number mentioned by the seller on them at the time of issue which is mandatory requirement under Rule 54 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003 (HVAT Rules"). The assessee went in appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 7.6.2012, Annexure A.4, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. The review petition filed by the appellant also met the same fate vide order dated 27.8.2013, Annexure A.7 passed by the Tribunal. Hence the instant appeals by the assessee-appellants. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Learned counsel for the assessee-appellants submitted that the Assessing Officer had never doubted the transaction. Further, tax charged by the seller, and the payment by the purchaser to the seller and in turn by the seller to the department was undisputed. The returns filed by the seller and the buyer were not doubted. The seller's assessment was finalized where the turnover had been accepted. Reference was made to Section 28(2) of the HVAT Act rega....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (a) in respect of every sale of goods, effected by him (i) to any dealer; (ii) to any other person on credit; (iii) to any other person on cash, where the sale price of the goods exceed one hundred rupees or such other amount not exceeding five hundred rupees, as may be prescribed, compulsorily, otherwise, on demand by such person, issue to the purchaser, where he is a VAT dealer to whom the goods are sold for resale by him or for use by him in manufacture or processing of goods for sale, a tax invoice, otherwise a retail/other sale invoice, - (A) in the case of specific or ascertained goods, at the time the contract of sale is made; and (B) in the case of unascertained or future goods, at the time of their appropriation to the contract of sale; showing the prescribed particulars: Provided that if the contract of sale requires that the goods be delivered over a period of time, he may issue a delivery note showing the prescribed particulars at the time of dispatch of the goods, every time such dispatch is made, and when the delivery of the goods is complete or a month closes in between, he shall issue a consolidated tax invoice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... purchaser can be penalized where the seller does not comply with the same. In our opinion, the answer would be in the negative. The non mentioning of the buyer's name or TIN number as it is issued by the seller cannot be taken to be fatal against the buyer and benefit of input tax credit declined to the buyer on that basis alone. The purpose of incorporating Rule 54(3) of he HVAT Rules is to safeguard the interest of the revenue from non-genuine transactions. It is procedural in nature and does not confer any substantive right. In the event of non-mentioning of the name and TIN No. of the buyer, a heavy onus is cast on the said dealer to produce material to discharge the said onus by producing other sufficient evidence to show that the transaction was genuine and it had made payment of VAT to the seller. Moreover, it is not within the control of the purchaser to ensure that the tax invoice contains his name and TIN No. as it is issued by the seller. Unless a mandatory duty is cast on the seller to issue tax invoice with such particulars, the purchasers cannot be penalized for no fault of theirs. 10. The Gujarat High Court in Vimal Enterprise's case (supra) while conside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds are received as inputs, however, the credit is denied on the ground that the Bill of entry is not endorsed in the name of the appellant. Rule 57G does not require that for taking credit of duty, the bill of entry should be endorsed in the name of the claimant. Counsel for the revenue could not point out any provision of law in the Act or the Rules regarding the endorsement of bills of entry. In the absence of any provision regarding endorsement on the bill of entry, the credit of duty cannot be denied on the ground that the bill of entry is not endorsed in the name of the claimant. As stated here above, what is required to be established for taking credit of duty is that the goods used as inputs are duty paid and that the credit of duty paid on the said goods has not been taken. In the facts of the present case, the evidence on record i.e. the bills of entry together with the certificates issued by excise authorities at Surat and Goa clearly show that the goods imported and cleared under the bills of entry on payment of duty were received and utilized by the appellant as inputs in its factory and that the importer has not utilized the credit of duty paid on the said goods. Thus,....