TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 928
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e provisions of Section 19(2) and Section 19(4) of the Act (in W.P.9853 of 2010 and batch) (iii) Penalty for the aforesaid additions/enhancements to turnover based on Section 27(3)(a) of the Act (in both batches of writ petitions) 3. Heard the detailed submissions of Mr.Prasad and Mr.AN.Ramanathan, learned counsels appearing for the petitioners and Mrs.J.Padmavathy Devi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the Commercial Taxes Department in all writ petitions. 4. The petitioners are manufacturers and traders in gold and silver jewellery. In the course of their business, the petitioners purchase worn-out jewelry from unregistered dealers as well as gold bullion from registered dealers both within the state, utilizing the same in the manufacture of new jewellery. The provisions of Section 12 of the Act provide for the levy of tax on purchases from registered dealers or any person in circumstances where no tax is payable by the registered dealers and where the goods purchased are used in the manufacture of other goods for sale. Credit is available on the tax paid on such purchasers. 5. According to the petitioners they are entitled to the credit of tax p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8 143065 143065 273592 - 1263673 1537265 273592 179195 18.3.08 12 Mar, 2008 4363149 5203423 183877 183877 - 840274 5387300 4547026 - - 7. I do not propose to extract factual details in respect of each writ petition for the sake of brevity and also for the reason that though the specific numerical details would vary, the issue they pertain to remain one and the same and the conclusion that I reach in this writ petition would apply on all fours in respect of all the writ petitions without exception. WP(MD)Nos.8062 to 8064 of 2010 and 9853, 8065 to 8067 of 2010 (in re.Bhima Jewellers) challenge various proceedings of the respondent including assessments. The summary of the writ petitions in the case of Bhima Jewellers have been circulated by way of a chart and I extract the chart below for the sake of convenience. Sl. W.P.No. Issue involved Prayer 1 8061 of 2010 Reversal of input credit relying on the provisions of Section 19(2)(ii) and Section 19(4) Writ of Declaration to declare the provisions of Section 19(2)(ii) and Section 19(4) as unconstitutional. 2 8062 of 2010 Reversal of input cre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the petitioner, supported its stand. The reply of the petitioner (in W.P.No.9853 of 2010 and batch) dated 01.02.2010 is extracted below to illustrate the stand taken by the petitioners in assessment: 'With reference to your above referred notices the matter concerning the claim of purchase tax under Sec.12 has already been clarified as per letter No.VAT Cell 7067/2007/ (VCC No.627) dated 31.05.2007 clearly mentioning it that purchase tax paid on the purchase of beaten up gold when utilized for manufacture is eligible for input tax credit. The Details are as below: 2007-2008 Apr - 07 3477241 34772 May-07 3780627 37806 Jun-07 2399299 23993 Jul-07 2955984 29560 Aug-07 4655883 46559 Sep-07 5312260 53123 Oct-07 10407973 104080 Nov-07 14160883 141609 Dec-07 198338 198338 ---------- 699840 --------- For the period from April 2007 to August 2007, the purchase tax Rs. 154444/- has been paid to you as per your instruction vide Chq.No.68869 dated 26.09.2007 and taken the claim in Nov.07 as per out letter dated 20.12.2007. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y was done in Kerala, the ITC claim should be reversed. Finally, the respondent contends that the orders under challenge are appealable orders and since no fundamental right has been violated in the instance goods nor is there an allegation of violation of the principles of natural justice, the petitioner should be relegated to appellate remedy. 12. Coming to the first issue in regard to purchase tax, the argument advanced by the respondent in the counter to WP(MD)No.9853 of 2010 at para-4 of the counter is extracted below: '4.It is submitted that the Petitioner has mentioned the purchase tax under section 12(2) but in no where pointed out that the purchase tax has been paid in the month of purchase in the Form I submitted by the petitioner. For example for month of April 2007 the tax liability is Rs. 1754725-00 under section 19(1). Eligible credit under section 19(1) is Rs. 2065923-00. The balance amount of Rs. 688802-00 was only paid through cheque on 16-5-2007. The liability of Rs. 34,772-00 under section 12(2) was not paid in the return filed for the month of April 2007.' 13. I am of the considered view that the assessing authority has not apprec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-section (2) of section 19 of the 2006 Act is, thus, declared bad in law.' 16. In the light of the above, this issue is also held in favour of the assessee. 17. The petitioner, in W.P.(MD)No.8061 of 2010 seeks a writ of declaration, declaring the provisions of Section 19(2)(ii) and Section 19(4) as unconstitutional, normally a writ of declaration is heard and decided by the Division Bench. In this case, this very issue has been adjudicated upon by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Patina Gold (supra) and hence rather than placing this matter before the Division Bench for orders, the petitioner would request that the decision of the Division Bench be followed in this case as well, the facts as well as position in law being identical. No objection has expressed by the revenue to this request and hence this writ petition is allowed following the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Patina Gold (supra). 18. In summary, all writ petitions are allowed in the light of the detailed discussion above. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. ============= Document 1 3. கேளà¯à®µà®¿ à....