TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1036
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Notification No. 102/2007. The issue involved in all the 9 appeals is the same and pertains to refund of SAD claimed by the respondent for different periods. The details of the refund claims and period are given herein below: Sl. No. Appeal No. Amount Period 1 C/21514/2017 Rs. 47,898.50 July to August 2015 2 C/21515/2017 Rs. 21,392 August 2015 3 C/21516/2017 Rs. 42,202 August 2015 4 C/21517/2017 Rs. 21,544 August 2015 5 C/21518/2017 Rs. 57,009 September to October 2015 6 C/21519/2017 Rs. 1,46,127 September to October 2015 7 C/21520/2017 Rs. 1,42,965 November 2015 to February 2016 8 C/21521/2017 Rs. 1,37,014 January to June 2016 9....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the respondent has failed to comply with the conditions of the Notification; specifically Condition (d) and (e) of the Notification. He also submitted that the Commissioner (A) has failed to appreciate that as per KVAT Act, the registration is issued to the main unit and other business premises are added and shown as additional premises in the registration. Whereas in the present case, there are three units working under different premises with distinct addresses and if the main registration is issued to M/s. Mohiudeen Saw Mills and the other two should have been added and shown as additional premises in the registration. He further submitted that in the instant case, the registration is issued by KVAT to the unit M/s. Mohiudeen Saw Mil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mohiudeen Saw Mills and M/s. Hajee Timber Complex registered dealer under Section 22 of the KVAT Act, 2003, borne on the files of VSO 261, Bantwal bearing TIN No.29510061860. She further submitted that in the past on the same issue, the Department has not raised any objection and for the earlier period April 2015 to july 2015, the Commissioner (A) has passed a similar order dated 15.3.2017 bearing No.69-72/2017 on this very same ground but in those cases the department for the reasons best known to them has not filed any appeal against that order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the respondent is a proprietor of both the organization and he has been allotted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... TIN number for all the business owned by him in the State of Karnataka. There is no provision to issue more than one TIN number to an individual under KVAT Act, 2003." Though this endorsement had been produced by the importer before the lower adjudicating authority he has not taken into consideration these important documents issued by the VAT authorities which has an important bearing on the issue. It is on account of this that the VAT payment challan indicate the name as Mohiudeen Saw Mills and Hajee Timber Complex and common return have been filed. However, this is only because two entitles have a single TIN No., as they have a common Proprietor and under the VAT Laws as explained by the Commercial Tax Officer, Proprie....