(1.) This is an appeal filed challenging the competent authority's refusal to issue a clarification under Sec. 94 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, 'Act', for short.
(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the leaned Senior Government Pleader for the Department of Commercial Taxes.
(3.) Appellant, who is admittedly a dealer, filed an application for clarification. Thereafter, it sought amendment of the points regarding which clarification was sought for. All the three issues so raised, taken together would clearly show that in their ultimate analysis, all that the appellant wanted was a finding by the authority for clarification that the tax suffered as service tax under the Finance Act, 1994 in relation to any portion of work carried out by the dealer should be permitted to be deducted while determining the turnover for the purpose of levy of tax and payment under the optional scheme in terms of Sec. 8(a) of the Act. The authority refused to entertain that application.