2018 (10) TMI 1528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2) For The Respondent : MR PRANAV TRIVEDI, AGP (64) ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee to challenge two separate orders, both dated 12.03.2018, passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) dismissing the assessee's appeals for want of predeposit. 2. Brief facts are as under: 2.1 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly on this ground upon which the present Tax Appeals are filed. 3. Learned Counsel Shri Bhatt for the appellant submitted that the only reason for making addition in the assessment orders was that the registrations of the selling dealers were cancelled ab-initio. Input tax credit in relation to such purchasers was denied in the hands of the assessee. The contention in this regard were (i) that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessing Officer had put the assessee to notice. The assessee only contended that mere cancellation of registration of the dealers would not be sufficient to deny the tax credits. He did not produce any evidence on actual movement of goods. In this context, he relied on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Madhav Steel Corporation Vs. State of Gujarat dated 12.12.2013 in Tax App....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee was also put to notice about such proposal. It was in this context that the assessee had represented to the Assessing Officer during the course of the assessment under the communication dated 05.03.2016 taking a stand that mere cancellation of registration of the dealers with backdate would not be sufficient to disallow the tax credit. 7. The question of disallowing the tax credit ....