The High Court of Karnataka held that merely for the reason that C-Forms are filed belatedly, it cannot be rejected since the aim of the legislature is to provide a concessional tax benefit to the assessee and the same cannot be rejected on the ground of technical errors.
The Court accordingly asked the Appellate Tribunal to reconsider the applications submitted by the petitioner for the production of C-Forms as well as original C-Forms.
The petitioner, Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Private Limited is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the manufacturing of earthmoving equipment such as hydraulic excavators, excavator loaders, wheel loaders, transit mixers, compactors, motor graders, cranes, etc. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the KVAT Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner claims that relate to the tax periods, the turn over on the interstate sales of equipment, pieces of machinery and spares not covered by C-Forms were subjected to the higher rate of tax by the Assessing Authority. The Assessing Authority had levied penalty and interest under Section 72(2) and Section 36 of the KVAT Act.
The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal rejected the additional C-Forms submitted by the petitioner along with an interim application on the grounds that it was filed belatedly.
The division bench consisting of Justice S. Sujatha and Justice Jyoti Mulimani held that Merely for the reason that C-Forms are filed belatedly, it cannot be rejected.
“It is not in dispute that concessional levy of tax which is provided by the legislature is to the benefit of the assessee if such benefit is denied on technicalities, the purpose, and object of extending the concessional rate of tax would be defeated,” the bench said.
“It is apparent that the petitioner has not placed on record satisfactory material to establish the circumstance of consignment agent and purchasers withholding the concerned declaratory Forms disabling the petitioner in producing the same within the relevant time prescribed under Rule 12(7) of the Rules. Similarly, the original C-Forms now placed before this Court requires to be examined in the light of the material to be placed by the petitioner to substantiate the reasons for the delay subject to authenticity of the documents,” the bench observed.
The bench deemed it appropriate to remand the matters to the Appellate Tribunal along with interim application to reconsider the applications submitted by the petitioner for the production of C-Forms as well as original C-Forms.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
