2016 (3) TMI 1290

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....State Vikas Kumar and Gunjesh Kumar for the BSBCL ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The writ application was initially filed challenging the notices dated 16.6.2015 and 8.7.2015 for the periods 2014-15 and 2015-16 by which the petitioner was directed to explain as to why appropriate proceedings be not initiated against the petitioner for payment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cordingly received much less price than the revised MRP list issued by the Beverages Corporation which showed the levy of VAT-3 also and thus the petitioner has failed to collect the VAT-3 from the customers. It was also prayed that the petitioner therefore be made free from the liability of VAT-3 for the period 2014-15 and further, for the period 2015-16 the VAT-3 should be determined on the basi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al sale price. It is submitted that the said facts had already been replied by the petitioner in response to the notices and if at all the respondents intended to pass an order in the matter then the petitioner ought to have been given opportunity of supplying the details of the sale, etc., made by him by filing proper return and on the basis of books of accounts of the petitioner, instead of proc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e whether the revised MRP was printed on the bottles or not and the levy of VAT-3 has been made on the basis of actual sale price at which they have been sold and not the MRP as printed on the bottles, which cannot be the basis for levy of sales tax. The petitioner having made clear that the sale had been made at a lower price than the revised MRP then the respondents are obliged to pass order und....