TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 456
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the appellant's case was without jurisdiction, inasmuch as it, inter alia relied, upon the provisions of Section 19(20) of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, Act 2006 (in short, 'the 2006 Act'). It was further contended that the Assessing Officer had also relied upon a circular dated 30.11.2009, without taking note of the subsequent circulars dated 04.11.2013 and 11.8.2015. 4.1. In sum, the appellant's case in the Writ Petition was that, the Assessing Officer had included the discount obtained by him from the sellers in his taxable turnover, which is, contrary to the provisions of Section 2(41) of the 2006 Act. The appellant says that since, he had not availed of any Input Tax Credit (ITC), no reversal of the same could have been brought about, as is required under the provisions of Section 19(20) of the 2006 Act, in case, the said provisions is triggered, as was erroneously sought to be done by the respondent. 4.2. For all reasons, according to the appellant, the illegality went to the root of jurisdiction of the respondent. The impugned assessment order, according to the appellant, was thus, liable to be set aside. 5. A perusal of the Assessment Order dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng directions: Total and taxable turnover determined under section 27(1)(a) of the TNVATACT 2006 for the year 2014-2015. 1. Discount amount received Rs. 1,15,91,011- at 14.5%- Rs. 16,80,697- 2. Sales suppression determined based on purchase suppression found Rs. 1,75,153/- at 14.5%- Rs. 25,397- Rs. 1,17,66,164/- at 14.5% TOTAL TAX determined Rs. 17,06,094/- ITC reversal u/s 27(2) Determined Tax Determined Penalty under Section 27(3)(c) Determined Penalty under Section 27(4)(ii) Determined Total Due Rs 1680697- 25397- 38096- 1680697- 34,24,887- Paid Rs 0 0 0 0 0 Balance Rs 1680697- 25397- 38096- 1680697- 34,24,887- 7.2. The appellant being aggrieved by the directions contained in the Assessment Order dated 30.12.2016, proceeded to challenge the same by way of writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. 8. As stated at the very outset, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that alternative remedy was available to the appellant. 9. Ms.Hemalatha, who appears on behal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....obliged him to carry out an enquiry and determine the market prices of like goods. Mr.Annamalai also indicated to us that the provisions of Section 19(20) of the 2006 Act could not have been invoked as ITC, in the instant case, was not claimed by the appellant. 11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 12. Before we proceed further, we may record that Ms.Hemalatha, who appears for appellant, says that, she is restricting the appeal only to the aspect concerning inclusion of discount in the taxable turnover of the appellant and that the other two aspects which relate to suppression of sales and imposition of penalty are not assailed. In other words, Mrs. Hemalatha says that the tax in the sum of Rs. 25,397/- determined on suppression of sales and penalty in the sum of Rs. 38,096/- will be paid by the appellant. Therefore, as indicated above, we only require to deal with one aspect of the matter, which is, as to whether discount could have been included in the taxable turnover of the appellant, the facts not being in dispute. For this purpose, we may set out in the first instance, the definition of turnover as given in Section 2(41) of 2006 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailed below. Opening Stock as per form ww Rs. 1096475 Add: Purchases as per others Annex II data Rs8,55,23,004 Total Rs. 8,66,19,479 Less: Closing Stock as per form ww Rs. 955148 Net Purchase Rs. 8,56,64,331 Sale Value Rs. 8,60,68,851 Gross Profit Rs. 404520 % of profit or loss Rs. 0 14. A perusal of the table extracted above, would show that the sales turnover for the period 2014-2015, for the year ending 31st March 2015 is Rs. 8,60,68,851/-. The total purchases made during the year is a sum of Rs. 8,55,23,004/-. Though not articulated clearly, it appears that the Assessing Officer has come to a conclusion that the sale price is lesser than the price at which the appellant has purchased the goods by including in the purchase turnover, the opening stock amounting to Rs. 10,96,475/-. Thus, the total purchase turnover, has been calculated by the Assessing Officer by pegging the same at Rs. 8,66,19,479/-. 15. According to us, the very basis of the calculation is flawed. The Assessing Officer was required to compare the unit sale price of the goods in issue with the unit purchase price. The inclusion of the opening stock, ....