MAYA RAJEEV Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner being a registered dealer under the KVAT Act, 2003 ('the Act' for short) on the rolls of the 1st respondent challenges Exts.P5 and P6 assessment orders for the year 2011 -12 and 2012 -13.

(2.) The challenge is only with reference to the limited extent of claiming special rebate in terms of Section 12(1) of the Act. In the year 2011 -12 the purchase turnover of the petitioner under Section 6(2) was 11,50,358/ - and the tax on the said amount would come to 1,43,795/ -. In respect the assessment year 2012 -13 the purchase turnover is 18,67,305.16/ - and the tax due computed at 13.5% is 2,52,086.18/ -. The total output tax payable by the petitioner during the relevant years was more than the special rebate claimed for the purchase turnover as per Section 6(2). However, while making the assessment, the assessing officer had only given a special rebate at 4% of the purchase turnover for the year 2011 -12 and 5% for the year 2012 -13. This according to the petitioner is on a wrong interpretation of the fourth proviso to Section 12(1) of the Act. The petitioner, therefore, challenges the vires of the statute viz., fourth proviso to Section 12(1) and alternatively contending that the method adopted by the assessing officer in giving rebate is absolutely wrong.

(3.) The alternate contention raised is based on the interpretation given by the assessing officer to the fourth proviso.