Allowed

Eminent Jewel Arcade Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

Kerala HC3 Aug 2017WP(C)/1093/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a gold dealer paying tax on a compounded basis under Section 8(f) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, challenged notices seeking purchase tax under Section 6(2). The High Court of Kerala allowed the writ pending an amendment to Section 6(2) by the Kerala Finance Act, 2017, which clarified that compounded tax exempts liability under Section 6(2) effective April 1, 2013. The court quashed

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed by quashing the impugned notices to the extent they proposed an assessment to purchase tax under Section 6(2) of the KVAT Act. The respondents were directed to finalize a

Eminent Jewel Arcade Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner… — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2017/12TH SRAVANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 1093 of 2017 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

EMINENT JEWEL ARCADE PVT. LTD., CHANGUVATTY, KOTTAKKAL, EDARIKODE P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 501, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI.MUJEEB REHMAN.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM.

¶11

2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KERALA, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 002.

¶12

3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT., TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

WP(C).No. 1093 of 2017 (J)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶19

P1 : COPY OF APPLICATION IN FORM 1B DATED 30-04-2013 (REVISED ON 25-03-2014) FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2013-2014.

¶20

P1(A) : COPY OF APPLICATION IN FORM 1B DATED 10-05-2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2014-2015.

¶21

P2 : COPY OF ANNUAL RETURN IN FORM 10DA IN RESPECT OF JEWELRY FOR 2013-2014.

¶22

P2(A) : COPY OF ANNUAL RETURN IN FORM 10DA IN RESPECT OF JEWELRY FOR 2014-2015. P3 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 08-12-2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-2014. P3(A) : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 03-10-2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-2015. P4 : COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.42/06 DATED 27-11-2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶23

P4(A) : COPY OF CIRCULARS NO.38/08 DATED 18-09-2008. P5 : COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.5/2014 DATED 11-02-2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶30

¶31

W.P.(C) No.1093 of 2017

¶32

- - - - Dated this the 3^rd day of August, 2017

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The petitioner in this writ petition is a dealer in gold ornaments, who had opted for payment of tax on compounding basis under Section 8(f) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act [hereinafter referred to as the “KVAT Act']. For the assessment years 2013-14 onwards, the Assessing Authorities, while completing the assessments pertaining to the petitioners, took a stand that insofar as the tax payable at the concessional rate under Section 8(f) of the KVAT Act is in lieu of tax on sale, and not in lieu of purchase tax under Section 6(2) of the KVAT Act, the said tax under Section 6(2) would be payable by the dealers on regular basis, and assessed under a regular assessment. In this writ petition, the pre-assessment notices issued to the petitioners by the adjudicating authority under the KVAT Act, are called in question, to the extent, they propose the levy of purchase tax under Section 6 (2), and imposition of a consequential penalty, on the ground that the payments of tax on compounded basis under Section 8(f) of the KVAT Act, will not exonerate the dealer from the liability to purchase tax under Section 6(2) of the KVAT Act.

¶35

During the pendency of this writ petition, the Kerala

¶36

W.P.(c).No.1093 of 2017

¶37

: 2 :

¶38

Finance Act, 2017, was enacted with effect from 1.4.2017. Through the said Act, Section 6(2) of the KVAT Act was amended by inserting the following proviso to Section 6(2)(a), namely,

¶39

“provided that notwithstanding anything contained in clause (f) of Section 8, a dealer paying compounded tax for the goods mentioned in that clause, shall not be liable to pay tax under this sub section on such goods with effect from 1^st April, 2013”.

¶40

The amendment aforementioned has the effect of clarifying that, dealers paying tax on compounded basis under Section 8(f), need not pay tax under Section 6(2) of the KVAT Act, on the goods in question, with effect from 1.4.2013. In view of the amendment with effect from 1.4.2013, this writ petition is allowed, by quashing the impugned notices to the extent they propose an assessment to purchase tax. The respondents shall do the needful in finalising the assessments in relation to the petitioner on the basis of the observations in this judgment.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶43

sm/

Eminent Jewel Arcade Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eminent Jewel Arcade Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ligy George a Vs a.K.Aravindakshan

Augustine Sumesh C.J Vs M.R.Unni

Sanitha K.V Vs Pravda Peter

Koshy George Vs C.F.Robert

Kuttan Vs a.S.Anooja

R.Syamkumar Vs Mr.Muhammed Huwais