M/S. Guru Bhagavan Granites vs. The Commercial Tax
Held
The Court noted that the vires of Section 19(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, had been challenged by several assesses and was ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of ALD Automotive Private Limited Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, confirming the Madras High Court's decision. Given that the only issue in the assessment related to this provision, and its validity was established, the Court found no merit in the writ petitions as filed. However, in the interest of justice, the Court permitted the petitioners to file a statutory appeal against the impugned assessment orders. Such appeals, if filed within four weeks from the date of the order (09.07.2019), were to be taken on file by the appellate authority without reference to limitation and disposed of expeditiously after hearing the petitioners and in accordance with law.
Facts
The petitioners, M/s. Guru Bhagavan Granites and M/s. S.S. Manian Pharmas, filed writ petitions challenging assessment orders dated 31.12.2012 issued by the Commercial Tax Officers of Madurai and Ambasamudram. The assessment orders pertained to tax periods including 2006-07, 2008-09, and 2009-2010. The core issue in these assessments was the availment of input tax credit (ITC) under Section 19(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioners sought to quash these orders and direct the respondent authorities to accept their returns and allow the claimed ITC.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned assessment orders, which disallowed input tax credit based on Section 19(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, are illegal? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that the assessment orders were illegal, primarily concerning the disallowance of input tax credit. They sought to have these orders quashed and the ITC allowed. Respondent's arguments: The respondent authorities, represented by the Government Advocate, did not explicitly record arguments in the judgment. However, the court's decision implies that the respondent's action was based on the interpretation and application of Section 19(11) of the Act, which had been upheld by higher courts.
Sections Cited
Section 19(11)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.07.2019 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH W.P.(MD)Nos.1621, 1622, 1142 and 1489 of 2013 and M.P(MD) No. 1 of 2013 W.P.(MD) No.1621 of 2013: M/s.Guru Bhagavan Granites Represented by its Managing Partner S.Rajaa
... Petitioner M/s.S.S.Manian Pharmas, Represented by its Proprietor V.Sankaranarayanan, 82A, Market Main Road, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. Petitioner /Vs./ The Commercial Tax Officer, Chokkikulam Assessment Circle, Madurai. ... Respondent The Commercial Tax Officer, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. ..Respondent PRAYER:- Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondent proceedings in TIN 33025001449//2006-07, 33025001449/2008-09, 33415620628/2008-2009 and 33415620628/2009-2010 dated 31.12.2012 and quash the same as illegal and direct the respondent to accept the returns and allow Input TAX Credit claimed by the petitioner in acco
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.