Smt.Sible Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 11 October, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OT.Rev.No. 51 of 2010()


1. SMT.SIBLE JOSEPH, M/S. PRIYA FOOD
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :11/10/2010

 O R D E R
                 C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &
                     K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
                  --------------------------------------------
                   O.T. Rev. (VAT) No. 51 of 2010
                  --------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 11th day of October, 2010

                                JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair, J.

The question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified in

declining petitioner’s prayer for direction to give input tax credit at full

rate of tax, that is 12.5 per cent as against 4 per cent granted. The

commodity namely prawns and chicken attracts tax at 12.5 per cent.

By mistake the supplier appears to have charged only 4% and based on

the bills produced, petitioner is granted credit of input tax only to the

extent paid. However, petitioner’s case is that supplier is assessed to

tax at 12.5 per cent and therefore petitioner is entitled to input tax

credit at the same rate. Strangely, petitioner has not been able to get

debit note from the supplier for the differential tax in terms of proviso

to Section 11(5) of the Act. We do not find anything wrong in the

Tribunal declining to grant the relief because petitioner has not

admittedly satisfied the condition in terms of above provision of the

statute. It is for the petitioner to obtain and produce debit note or

O.T. Rev. (VAT) No. 51/2010 2

declaration in terms of the statute from the supplier, if he gives it,

before the assessing officer, for which purpose we grant one month’s

time to the petitioner from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

S.T. Revision is disposed of with direction to the assessing

officer to reconsider the matter if the petitioner obtains and produces

the required records within one month as above. However, if no

document is produced within the time granted, ST Rev. will be treated

as dismissed.

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.

(K. SURENDRA MOHAN)
Judge.

kk

O.T. Rev. (VAT) No. 51/2010 3