2017 (9) TMI 948

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ered dealer on the file of the respondent, under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (in short "the TNVAT Act") and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, is before this Court, seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to consider their petitions/letters/representations, dated 30.03.2017, and to pass revised orders, by cancelling the reversal of ITC of Rs. 1,98,249/- and Rs. 7,25,183/-, wrongly made, and also direct the respondent to refund the ITC of Rs. 1,98,249/- and Rs. 7,25,183/-, respectively. 3. At the outset, it has to be pointed out that, a batch of cases in M/s.Everest Industries Ltd., Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by Secretary and another, W.P.No.7969, 10585 of 2014, etc., (batch) da....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., as long as specified goods, which suffer tax are used for any of the purposes set out in clauses (i) to (vi) of sub-section (2) of Section 19, the assessee should be able to claim the ITC, with a caveat in so far as clause (v) is concerned. The caveat being, the limitation, which is encapsulated in the proviso to Section 19(2) of the 2006 Act. Therefore, the limitation provided in the proviso would apply only vis-a-vis the purpose specified in clause (v) and not qua other purposes set out in clause (i) to (iv) and (vi) of Section 19(2) of the 2006 Act. 20.4 If, that be the conclusion, then, surely, none of the impugned orders can sustain. The fact that, the proviso, on account of erroneous interpretation by the Revenue, was causing dif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ief sought for by the petitioner, by contending that as against the decision in the case of M/s.Everest Industries Ltd.'s case (supra) the State has preferred Appeals and the same are in SR Stage, yet to be numbered (as the papers relating to the Appeals have been returned by the Registry for certain compliances). 6. In view of the submission of the learned Government Advocate for the respondent, it appears that the State is in the process of preferring Appeals, by re-presenting the Appeal papers and the Appeals are yet to be numbered. The settled legal position being that, mere pendency of the Appeal(s), without interim order(s), will not amount to the grant of stay of the order(s) passed by the Lower Court or Lower Forum. In the in....