CBDT says: Value Taxpayer’s time and do not make them wait

The  CBDT in its office memorandum  dated 22.08.2014 has pointed out that few Assessing officers, while issuing notices for appearance,  indicates a standard time to all the respondents and therefore many persons called for hearing etc on a day by an officer are given the same time for appearance and the persons are made to wait for their turn. It has been pointed out that such actions, apart from causing avoidable inconvenience to the taxpayers/ witnesses/ representatives etc cause great embarrassment to the Government. All officers have been advised to maintain the appointment schedule strictly in spirit with the Citizen’s Charter, 2014 of the Department which specifically provides that the Department shall endeavour “to adhere to the schedule of appointments with taxpayers”. All Supervisory officers, i.e. the CCsIT, CsIT and the Addl. CsIT have been requested to ensure that officers reporting to them strictly comply with this instruction and avoid fixing multiple appointments at the same time. 

For  copy of the memo-Please Click here

Claim of Input Tax Credit, if the sellers found non existing

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

M/S. MILAN PLYWOOD SUPPLIERS

VS.

STATE OF KARNATAKA

Date of order- 10^th July, 2014

Mere existence of tax invoice does not ipso facto lead one to the conclusion that the goods had been sold to the assessee – Assessing Authority should have made an enquiry to find out the genuineness of the transaction as set out by the Tribunal. It is only after such enquiry if the Assessing Authority is satisfied that the transaction in question is genuine one, the assessee has paid the money, he has received the goods and necessary entries are made in the books of accounts of the assessee, then merely because of the dealer has not remitted the tax would not enable the Assessing Authority to deny the benefit to the assessee. 

For full text of the judgment-  Please click here

Period in which the claim of goods return under CST Act can be made

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

M/s. Modern Dairies Limited
Vs.
The State of Haryana and others

Claim of credit of goods return under CST Act can be claimed only in the quarter in which the gods were returned.

Date of order 10/07/2014
While dealing with the question that whether Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in holding that the sales return are allowed to be deducted only in the year to which it relates and not in the period during which it has been returned back ignoring Rule 22(4) read with Section 9(2) of the CST Act, Hon'ble High Court refer to the provisions of Rule 22 (4) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003 and observed that "the assessee is not entitled to claim the benefit of return of goods sold to any person in any other quarter except the quarter in which the goods have been returned. In our opinion, no other meaning can be assigned to the said rule".Matter remanded

For full text of judgment- please click here
Readers may also refer to - 1983(53)STC 48

GUJARAT HIGH COURT- REDUCTION OF ITC IN CASE OF CST SALES, JUSTIFIED

High Court of GUJARAT
Reversal of Input tax Credit (2%), if the goods are sold in course of inter-state trade or commerce- Sustained

KADWANI FORGE LTD. & OTHERS

Vs.

STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS

Date: 22nd July 2014

The Court held-

 "It appears that the impugned notifications are issued reducing the input tax credit to the extent of 2% on the goods supplied outside State of Gujarat in the larger public interest and to ensure adequate funds in the development programme of the State. Reduction of the rate of central sales tax from 4% to 3% with effect from 01.04.2007 and from 3% to 2% with effect from 01.06.2008 and the failure on the part of the Central Government to compensate the State for the losses on account of the aforesaid reduction can be said to be
one of the cause and/or reason. It appears that as the State has suffered loss of thousands of crores of revenue due to the said reduction and the Central Government failed to compensate the said losses and it has been found that the tax revenue of the State has been adversely affected, when the impugned notifications are issued it can neither be said to be arbitrary nor illegal and/or unconstitutional."

For full text- Please click here

Held by High Court of Karnataka:-

M/s. MicroFx

Vs

The State of Karnataka

09/07/2014
When the goods involved is a "portable handheld ticketing machine" that is how the assessee has described the machine and that is how the customers have also understood it and in the Central Excise Tariff Act this ticket issuing machines are expressly included in Entry 8470, the Court cannot hold that it falls under 8471 especially when it specifically states that "not elsewhere specified or included" - By virtue of the words used in 8471 "not elsewhere specified or included", 8471 do not include ticket issuing machines. When ticket issuing machines are expressly mentioned in 8470 and in the notification issued on 31.3.2006 under the heading "the Information Technology product" 8470 is not included, the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of 4% tax – Revision petitions dismissed.


For full text of Judgment- Please click here

TRIPURA-VAT- TDS ON CONSIDERATION FOR RIGHT TO USE OF GOODS

F.1- 1(43)- TAX/2013 (P-II)

Dated 16/08/2014

Published on 20/08/2014

Amendment of sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Rules, 2005.

Provision for deducting tax at source on consideration payable for right to use of goods.

For Notification- PLEASE CLICK HERE

Punjab Last date of filing VAT-15 for q.e. 30/06/2014 extended to 25/08/2014.

Dated: 19th August, 2014

PUBLIC NOTICE 

In the light large number of representations received from lawyers and trade bodies, it is notified that last date of filing of VAT-15 return of Quarter-1 ending 30th June, 2014 for the year 2014-15, has been extended to 25th August, 2014. However, dates for payment of tax will remain unchanged.

For Notification, Please Click here