ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT) Vs. BHAIRAV TRADING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Common issue in all the writ appeals filed by the Revenue is to the correctness of the orders passed by the writ court in setting aside the assessment orders passed by the competent authorities. As facts and law involved in all the writ appeals except W.A.No.753/2016, are common, they are being dispsoed of by this common judgment, and W.A.No.753/2016, is separately dealt with.

(2.) In view of the above, suffice to incorporate the averments and grounds of challenge from one appeal. Respondents in all the appeals, except W.A.No.753/2016, are the buying dealers, who have purchased goods from the selling dealers, whose Registration Certificates, have been cancelled by the Commercial Tax Department with retrospective effect. Consequently, input tax credits availed by the buying dealers for the purchases made, during the period, when the Registration Certificates of the selling dealers were in force, were reversed, which resulted in filing of the writ petitions, by the assessees for a writ of certiorari, to call for the proceedings of the Assessing Officers, contending inter alia that the said proceedings, are contrary to the principles of natural justice and the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Suresh Trading Co., 1998 109 STC 439, decisions of this court in Jinsasan Distributors vs. Commercial Tax Officer (CT), Chintadripet Assessment Circle, 2013 59 VST 256, Althaf Shoes (P) Ltd, 2012 50 VST 179, Vinayaga Agencies, 2013 60 VST 283, Aassan Global Trade in W.P.Nos.25996 to 25998 of 2014 and also in the case of M/s.Infiniti Wholesale Limited in W.P.No.9265 of 2013 respectively.

(3.) Before the writ court, contention has also been made that, so long as the purchasing dealers have complied with the requirements of Rule 10(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules (hereinafter referred to as VAT Rules), read with Section 19 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006 (hereinafter referrred to as VAT Act), the claim of the purchasing dealers to avail input credit, should not be denied, and merely because, the Registration Certificates of the seller dealers, have been cancelled with retrospective effect, reversal of input tax credit of the buying dealers, is contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Maharatshtra vs. Suresh Trading Co, 1998 109 STC 439 (SC) . Thus, for the abovesaid reasons, and other grounds inter alia, made in the supporting affidavits, respondents/buying dealers, have sought for a writ of certiorari, to quash the proceedings, impugned in the writ petitions.