Sunday, August 17, 2014


Non Advocates barred from appearing before the Authority under UP VAT Act (Interim Order)

Allahabad High Court 
in the case of 
Tax Lawyers Association Lko. 
Vs. 
State of  Uttar Pradesh.

as a Interim Measure held that no person whosoever, may be permitted to advertise in the Newspaper or any leaflet, inviting assesses for the purpose of filing of return or arguing before the authority under the VAT Act. Any person, who is not a registered advocate, shall not be permitted to appear before the Authority under the VAT Act. Judgment is a blow for Professionals like Chartered Accountant, Company Secretaries, Cost Accountants etc. who are working in the filed of UP VAT.

For full text of judgment, please click here

Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 

Appellant:- M/s SAURASHTRA ROADWAYS


Registration of Parcel/courier/transporting and clearing agencies functioning within the State are liable for registration.

Held- There is absolutely no bar on the legislature, to provide for registration of transporting agencies, who have an intimate and proximate connection, to the sales and purchase of goods, and also provide for filing of returns, and inspection of accounts of such transporting agencies. However, as the Act, stands now, it only mandates the latter and does not provide for registration. The statute having not provided for the same, the Commissioner as was noticed, is not entitled to bring in such transporting agencies invoking the administrative powers conferred under Section 3 of the KVAT Act.

W.P(C) Nos.28690 of 2011 & 31635 of 2011, Date: 1st AUGUST 2014 

For full text, click here

Friday, August 15, 2014

THE ASSAM VALUE ADDED TAX (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2014

GIST OF PROPOSALS OF AMENDMENTS IN AVAT (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2014

1. Part –II of the Explanation to clause (44) of section 2 shall be substituted as follows:-
(ii) any amount allowed by seller of goods to the purchaser as cash discount or commission or trade discount at the time of sale of goods subject to the condition that such discount or commission is shown in the original invoice.”

2. Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 13 shall be omitted.

3. New sub-section (3) will be inserted in section 13, which will read as:-
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, if after issuing invoice, any amount is allowed by a selling dealer to a purchaser as cash discount or commission or trade discount or sales incentive or otherwise and such amount is adjusted through credit note issued by such selling dealer to the purchaser or by any other means, the selling dealer shall not be allowed to reduce his output tax liability on account of such deduction".



concessional rate of entry tax on import of raw materials

कच्चे माल के आयात पर प्रवेश कर हटाने की मांग को नज़रअंदाज़ किया गया, टेक्स रेट में रियायत देने का झुनझुना। 



Different Institutions and trade associations has urged in their pre-budget memorandums to abolish entry tax on the import of raw materials by industries. Unfortunately, this demand was totally overlooked by Hon'ble Minister. However he said- "To promote industrialization in the State, especially MSME sector, I propose to allow concessional rate of entry tax on all raw materials, used by local industries, if such raw materials are not available locally. I will instruct industries Department to draw up a scheme for this purpose".

Thursday, August 7, 2014

VATassam.com:
CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL  - SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE SHOULD PREVAIL

 "In our view, condoning the delay always advances the cause of justice and afford opportunity to parties to contest their case on merits whereas; declining to condone results in depriving them of an opportunity of hearing on merits. By this expression, we do not mean to suggest that in every case the court should always condone the delay. All that we wish to say is that by and large, the approach of the court should be to ensure that substantial justice is done to parties by affording them an opportunity of hearing on the merits of the case." This was observed recently on 19/05/2014 by a division bench of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in Pawan Enterprises' case WP(C) 2476 of 2014.

In the above case, the appeal before tribunal was delayed by  2 months and 19 days and Hon'ble Tribunal rejected the prayer for condonation on the ground that illness of the staff who signed the appeal cannot be a genuine cause for delay. Hon'ble High Court, while relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in "Sangram Singh –vs -Election Tribunal, Kotah and another, AIR 1955 SC 425" held that the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should have been condoned. Since the Tribunal did not do it, we, on our own, condone the delay.
In the said Judgment, the Division bench also held that signing of appeal by should not be basis to dismiss the appeal and the Tribunal could have granted an opportunity to writ petitioners to rectify the defects.
.