Highlights of Four parts of Vol. 25, pub. in 2016 of "JKJAIN'S VAT REPORTER" from the House of J.K.Jain's (Since 2004)

VOL.25:

PART-1 DATED 9.1.2016

Supreme Court cases:

Penalty for failure to furnish information, return, etcDefaultProvisions for imposing the penalty on date of default, applicable(2016) 25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER  1 SEBI Through Its Chairman v. Roofit Industries Ltd.(SC)

Annual ReturnFailure to Furnish by the prescribed dateA default of non filing of return occurs on the expiry of time limit fixed for its filing(2016) 25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 7 State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi (SC)

VOL.25:

PART-2 DATED 24.1.2016

High Court cases:

ReturnRelief/benefits not claimed in the ReturnNo relief/benefits can be given without filing a revised Return(2016) 25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 27 Nandi Constructions v. The State of Karnataka (Kar)  

Rajasthan Tax Board case:

Works ContractDeemed SaleMovement of goods form one State to another as a result of contract of sale. Taxing this transfer of inter-State purchase of goods used in execution of works contract, by treating it as a deemed local sale is beyond the powers of the State(2016) 25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 35 Commercial Taxes Officer (W & LT) v. I.C. Jain Contractor (TBSB)

VOL.25:

PART-3 DATED 9.2.2016

Supreme Court case:

Penalty for evasion of taxPenalty can not be imposed merely on some suspicion           25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 47 Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. K.T.C. Automobiles (SC)

Sale of motor vehicles from Branch office in other State to avail benefits of lower tax rate--Sale was held to be co-terminus with registration of a new motor vehicle in other State25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 47 Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. K.T.C. Automobiles (SC)        

Penalty for evasion of taxBurden of proof is on the Deptt.25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 47 Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. K.T.C. Automobiles (SC)

High Court cases:

Purposive and beneficial interpretation in favour of the Assessee25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 59 Pali Zila Dughdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd, Pali-Marwar v. C.T.O. (Raj)          

Misuse of declaration Form ST-17Debatable issue of imposition of taxno penalty is leviable25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 56 C.T.O., Suratgarh v. D.K.Gwar Udyog, Sri Bijaynagar (Raj)                 

Penalty u/s 78(5), RST Act, 1994Penalty imposed on the basis of doubtNot tenable25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 55 Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer v. Ram Deen Bhanwar Lal (Raj)                                                                                      

VOL.25:

PART-4 DATED 24.2.2016

High Court cases:

InterestFailure to furnish returnsIn such a case, the AA has to determine the tax payable and issue notice of demand to the assessee and interest is leviable only when this demand is not paid by the due date25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 77 Pure Drinks (New Delhi) Ltd. v. The Member, Sales Tax Tribunal (DEL)

[Also read Editorial Comments]

[Other Case Law on the Same Issue:  E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd. v. ACCT (2005) 3 J.K.JAIN’S Vat Reporter 267 (SC)]

Burden of proofFor holding that the transactions are liable to tax, the Burden of proof is on the AA25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 91 Bikaner Woolen Mills Pvt. Ltd. v.  Assistant Commissioner (Raj)

SaleTaxability of Packing material25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 95 C.T.O., A/E, Bhilwara v. Suzuki Textiles Ltd. (Raj)  

Fuel and Lubricant‘Diesel’ is fuel and lubricant and is covered by the definition of Raw material25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 97 Commercial Taxes Officer, A/E, Jhunjhunu v. Hindustan Copper Ltd.(Raj)

Rajasthan Tax Board cases:

Burden of proofClassification DisputeFor holding that the product classification as claimed by the assessee is not correct, the Burden of proof is on the AA25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 107 Assistant Commissioner v. Glazetek Elpanel (TBDB)  

“Water supplied in Camper” is exempt25 J.K.JAIN’S VAT REPORTER 103 Esale Enterprises v. Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer (TBDB)

[Other Case Law on the Same Issue:  Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer v. Ship Mineral Water (TBDB), appeal No.1816/2007/Jaipur decided on 11.2.2016]

[Also read Editorial Comments]