2021 (11) TMI 440

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he aspect of limitation expiring during the COVID-19 pandemic has already been dealt with by Hon'ble the Supreme court in Misc. Application No. 665/2021 of SMW(C) No.3 of 2020. In view thereof, the appeal is held to be within limitation. Office is directed to allot regular number to the appeal. Order in memo of appeal Admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- 1. Whether the finding of the learned appellate Tribunal on the imposition of VAT on category no.3 is based on an error of law in ignoring the provisions of Section 8 of Uttar Pradesh Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership and Maintenance) Act, 2010 along with Section 2(y) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008? 2. Whether an alternati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... attention to definition under Section 2(y) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2008) to submit that purchase price would mean the amount payable by a purchaser to a seller as consideration for the purchase of any goods after deducting the amount, if any refunded to the purchaser by the seller in respect of any goods returned. Attention has also been drawn to explanation to Section 2(y) of the said Act to submit the exceptions to the purchase price, particularly exception (ii) that amount of tax if such amount is shown separately on the sale invoice or tax invoice would not be included in the purchase price. Learned counsel for the appellant has further drawn attention to final demand not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....udgment as well, in terms of clauses 10 and 11 of the Builder-Buyer Agreement, the learned Tribunal has clearly recorded that the respondent-Builder has not submitted any proof to the effect that there has been increase in Government rates, Taxes, Cess etc. but proof has been submitted only with regard to payment of VAT made by respondent-Builder. It is submitted that liability to reimburse the respondent for payment of VAT charges has been imposed upon the appellant only on the ground that the said liability has been admitted by the appellant. However, it is submitted that there was no admission on part of the appellant for reimbursement of VAT charges and the alternative submission raised by the appellant before the Tribunal was taken ....