2016 (6) TMI 987

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 30/11/2015, passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under revisional jurisdiction, whereby the order passed by the first appellate authority is set aside and further re-assessment is ordered as mentioned in the operative portion of the said order. 5. The brief facts of the case are that appellant had filed monthly return restricting the input tax credit at the rate of 4% instead of 3%. Thereafter revised monthly returns were filed by the appellant and 4% input tax credit was claimed. On 31/12/2010, audited statements of accounts were also filed. On 4/7/2011, the Assessing Officer passed the revised order of assessment. On 1/8/2011, the appellant preferred an application for rectification of mistake, requesting to allow....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s that no reason whatsoever was mentioned by the revisional authority, has remanded the matter to the revisional authority. It was submitted that under the circumstances, this court may interfere in these matters. 9. Whereas, Mr.Vedamurthy, learned Government Pleader, relying upon the reasons recorded at paragraph No.7 of the impugned order contended that this is not a matter on par with the earlier matters considered by this court in STA.Nos.6/2016 and allied matters, wherein no reason whatsoever were recorded by the revisional authority, but in the present case, reasons are recorded at paragraph No.7 of the impugned order. He submitted that the ground canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant is erroneous. 10. However, when....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Therefore we hereby request your good self to kindly drop the proceedings. 22. In addition to the above we further submit that, as per section 11(a)(5) read with Section 14 of the Act, input tax should be restricted to that extent of 2% towards inputs which are attributable to goods stock transferred outside the State. If such inputs are not ascertainable on account of common use of inputs for both sales of taxable goods and goods stock transferred to outside the State, rule 131 provides for apportionment of such inputs towards taxable sales and stock transfers." The aforesaid paragraphs show that the revisional authority was fully conscious about the specific contention raised on behalf of the appellant for restricting the input tax....