TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 636
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ined the taxable turnover and has confirmed the tax liability of the petitioner as Rs. 5,55,418/- for the Assessment Year 2006- 07 and Rs. 21,18,592/- for the assessment year 2007-8. 4. The entire tax levy liability was discharged by the petitioner on the strength of Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs. 5,49,263/- and Rs. 21,15,792/- for the respective years, after adjustment towards CST sales. 5. In this connection, separate Show Cause Notice were issued to the petitioner on 29.12.2009 followed with other notices dated 04.10.2012. The petitioner had replied to the same on 10.12.2012 for the respective Assessment Years. 6. In these notices, it was contended by the respondent Assistant Commissioner (CT) that the petitioner had availed Input Tax ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2006. Impugned in W.P.No.10550 of 2014:- In the instant case the selling dealers (CC) Tvl. Sathyam Marketing and Tvl.Surabhi Trading vifoul sales corporation ITC claim and had been entirely disallowed and reversed as not paid any tax by their sellers (i.e) Alishek Traders to Real Traders as listed above and purchase as Tvl. Rama Metals, Chetra Enterprises etc. and thus calculated that the above dealer had purchased goods from unknown source and wrongly availed ITC and the purchases. In assessment as the seller ITC to the assessee had been entirely disallowed the claim of ITC now made by the dealer in full is revised in full over looking the objection filed by the dealer. Further the dealer had not proved that their claim of exemptio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be dismissed. 10. It is further submitted that some of the petitioner's dealers had resorted to circular transactions with a view to pass on Input Tax Credit (ITC) without pay tax by abusing the provisions under the then newly implemented TNVAT Act, 2006. 11. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. 12. The disputes in the present cases are better left to be adjudicated in appeals as there are disputed questions of fact and the appellate authority would be in a better position to call for the records to verify the claim of the petitioner. 13. In this case, the petitioner claims to have availed Input Tax Credit on the strength of invoices raised by some of the dealers who had in tur....