2026 (7) TMI 1345

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....respondent-State. 2. The tax appeal is filed under Section 78 of The Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short "the Act") raising the following substantial questions of law arising out of the judgement and order dated 16.10.2023 passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad (for short "the Tribunal") in Second Appeal No.1002 of 2022 for the Assessment Year 2017-18: "A. Whether under facts and circumstances of case, the learned Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal at Ahmedabad was justified by not providing sufficient time in production of statutory Form 'C even though there were attempts made by the Appellant production of above mentioned Statutory Form? B. Whether the First Appellate Authority was justif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt authorities were justified in assessing the Assesse at higher rate of tax despite the transaction being interstate sales." 3. The brief facts leading to filing of appeal are as under: 3.1 The appellant - assessee is engaged in manufacture and selling of various types of mosaics and is registered under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the CST") read with provisions of the Act. The Adjudicating Authority, vide order dated 30.12.2020, made audit assessment for the period 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 under CST Act by changing full tax at 5% and 15% on the interstate sales where the transactions were not supported by CST declaration Form 'C' and also by disallowing the export transaction deducti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....epted the belated production of partial 'C' Forms and had reduced the demand. It was observed by the Tribunal that the Assessment Year was 2017-18 and almost after a period of five years i.e. in the year 2022, the appellant was not in a position to produce the remaining 'C' Form. In view of this undisputed fact, the Second Appeal of the appellant was dismissed. 4. Today, Mr. Akshay Vakil, learned advocate for the appellant, has candidly submitted that even today i.e. in the year 2026, i.e. almost after three years from the order passed by the Tribunal and almost after nine years from the assessment year, the petitioner is not in a position to produce the remaining 'C' Form. 4.1 Section 6 of the CST Act is a charging provision creating....