TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 1162
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') proposing to assess the petitioner to a total taxable turnover of Rs. 10,86,23,456/- by adding the discount of Rs. 88,49,785/- which the petitioner received from the suppliers. An apprehension was expressed that the cement was sold at a price lesser than its purchase price and therefore the discount will form part of sales turnover. Petitioner replied and objected to the same. Thereafter, another preassessment notice was issued under Section 25(1) of the Act on 29/10/2013. Petitioner again filed a reply and the assessment was completed as per assessment order dated 22/04/2014, which is produced as Ext.P5. While completing the assessment, the 2nd responden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. The contention urged by the petitioner is three fold. One is that the officer himself had arrived at a conclusion in Ext.P5 order that the purchase value is less the discount received. Hence re-opening of the said assessment on that ground was improper. Another contention urged is that when the appellate authority had remitted the matter back for the purpose of deciding only one issue as to whether the disallowance of input tax on discount received was justified or not, there is no reason for the assessing officer to have considered the entire matter afresh. It is also contended that the assessing authority was not justified in disallowing input tax credit. The learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the judgment in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer was justified in taking such a view despite the fact that in an earlier occasion, a different view was taken in the matter. 5. The first question to be considered in the writ petition is whether there is any justification on the part of the assessing authority in having taken a different view in the matter despite the direction issued by the appellate authority. There is no dispute about the fact that the appellate authority remitted the matter back to consider whether the petitioner was entitled to input tax credit of discount. According to the learned Government Pleader, when an opportunity for hearing was given and the books were verified, the officer had to come to a conclusion that further notice has to be issued in terms of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under this sub-section shall be made where the dealer files revised return and pays the tax which has escaped assessment along with interest under sub-section (5) of Section 31 and thrice the interest as settlement fee. Provided also that the assessments pending as on 31st March, 2013 under this Section shall be completed on or before 31st March, 2014." 6. There is no doubt about the jurisdiction of the assessing officer in a case where it is noticed that part of the turn over of the business of a dealer has escaped assessment to tax in any year or return period or has been under assessed or has been assessed at a rate lower than the rate at which it is assessable or any deduction has been wrongly made therefrom or where any inp....