BharatTaxGST

The State Of Karnataka vs. M/S Priyanka Products

Original PDF →
STRP/1/2022HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01002384202202 November 2022Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGAFor Respondent: SRI. K.J.KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR M/S.KAMATH AND KAMATH., ADVOCATES

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - STRP No. 1 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T G SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA SALE TAX REVISION PETITION NO.1 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (APPEALS), MYSURU DIVISION, SHESHADRI BUILDING, DEEWANS ROAD, MYSURU – 570 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (AUDIT – 1), SHESHADRI BUILDING, DEEWANS ROAD, MYSURU – 570 001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA) AND: 1. M/S. PRIYANKA PRODUCTS, C - 182, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, YADAVAGIRI, MYSURU – 570 120. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.J.KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR M/S.KAMATH AND KAMATH., ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by YASHODHA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - STRP No. 1 of 2022 THIS STRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 65(1) OF KARNATAKA VALUE ADDED TAX 2003 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.05.2020 PASSED IN STA 661/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2017 PASSED IN APPEAL No. KVAT AP 109/16-17 ON THE FILE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES APPEALS, MYSURU DIVISION, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 62(6) OF THE KVAT ACT. 2003 AGAINST THE RE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.09.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 39(1) AND 72(2) OF KVAT ACT 2003 R/W RULE 46 OF KVAT RULES 2005, BY THE DCCT (AUDIT) 1 MYSURU OF THE TAX PERIODS OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2012 - 2013. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The assessee is the purchaser of goods. The Assessing Officer has disallowed the Input Tax Credit (for short 'ITC') on the ground that the seller has not paid the tax. The First Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal. KAT1 by the impugned order has allowed the appeal and set-aside the order of assessment and the order passed by the Appellate Authority. Hence, this 1 Karnataka Appellate Authority

- 3 - appeal is by the Revenue for consideration of the following question of law: (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the petitioner's case, the Tribunal was right in law, in allowing the Respondent's Appeal and holding that input tax credit is allowable in the hands of the Respondent, even if the selling dealer had not declared the output sales well as remitted the taxes on the said output sales along with the returns filed for said Tax period?

2.

It is the settled law that the ITC claimed by the purchaser cannot be disallowed on the ground that the seller has not made the payment. The Tribunal in Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the impugned order has recorded a finding of fact that the entire payment including the tax component was made through Account Payee Cheques, RTGS, NEFT.

3.

Government Advocate submits that Sri.Rajesh Jain's case has been challenged in SLP No.20053/2017. 5. In view of the above, the following: ORDER (i) The Revision Petition is dismissed. (ii) The question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

2 2017 (89) KLJ 305

- 5 - (iii) The parties shall be governed by the final decision in SLP No.20053/2017. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE

GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.