Kerala High Court
Kalyan Silks Trichur(P)Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner on 7 July, 2012
Author: A.M.Shaffique
Bench: A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/14TH BHADRA, 1938
WP(C).No. 28536 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
KALYAN SILKS TRICHUR(P)LTD.,
KURIACHIRA, OLLUR, THRISSUR-680 006,
(REPRESENTED BY GANESH T.A., COMPANY SECRETARY)
BY ADVS.SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN
SMT.V.P.SEENA DEVI
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE,
THRISSUR-680 001.
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR-680 001.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.SHAMSUDDIN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 05-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
msv/
WP(C).No. 28536 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE EXTRACT OF THE ANNUAL RETURN FOR 2013-14
FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPIES OF AUDIT REPORTS IN FORM 13 & 13A FOR
THE YEAR 2013-14 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF STOCK TRANSFER
RECEIPTS AS PER E-SUGAM DECLARATIONS UNDER THE
KARNATAKA VAT ACT.
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE
DATED 7-7-2012 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S BRANCH
AT BANGALORE BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, BANGALORE-1.
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 30-7-2016 ALONG
WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FILED BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1-8-2016 FILED BY
PETITIONERS BRANCH AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (AUDIT), BANGALORE WITH HIS
ENDORSEMENT.
EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 9-8-2016 ADDRESSED
BY PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.29/2011
DATED 7-12-2011 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
------------------------
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Msv/
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 28536 of 2016
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of September, 2016
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court inter alia seeking for a direction to provide e-service facility to the petitioner to revise the returns for the period 2013-14 for issuing F Form declarations.
2. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that the petitioner deals in textiles including readymade garments and is a registered dealer under the provisions of KVAT Act as well as CST Act on the rolls of first respondent. During the assessment year 2013-14, petitioner purchased goods directly from the suppliers outside the State and also obtained goods by stock transfer from the branches in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Petitioner has correctly accounted the goods received by purchase and stock transfer from the branches outside the State and also corresponding sales as evident from the returns filed. It is stated that the details of receipt of goods from the W.P.(C) No. 28536 of 2016 -2- branches were omitted to be uploaded along with the returns. In the course of assessment proceedings under the Karnataka VAT Act, the Commercial Tax Officer (Audit), Bangalore directed the petitioner to file F Form declarations for the stock transfer of goods as per Ext.P3 statement. Though the petitioner attempted to issue F Form declarations online by downloading the format for entering the details of the stock transfer receipts, petitioner could not generate the F Forms since the returns did not reflect the concerned invoices. It is stated that the petitioner can issue F Form declarations online only if the returns show the details of the stock transfer receipts and therefore, the revision of returns is necessary for uploading the stock transfer receipts. Petitioner made a request dated 30.7.2016 to the first respondent and a reminder was sent on 9.8.2016 as Ext.P7. Despite receipt of the same, the petitioner was not given the permission. Petitioner relies upon Ext.P8 circular in order to indicate that the petitioner is eligible to revise the returns for issuing F W.P.(C) No. 28536 of 2016 -3- Forms. However, since the respondents have not acted upon the request of the petitioner for revising the return, this writ petition is filed.
3. Statement has been filed on behalf of the first respondent inter alia stating that the petitioner's request for revising the returns for the assessment year 2013-14 could not be processed due to the restrictions imposed by the KVAT Act, 2003, especially under Sections 21 (2) and 42. It is stated that the petitioner had carried out stock transfer only for an amount of 2,45,80,599/-, whereas in the letter issued by the Karnataka Government Taxes Department, shows the stock transfer of consignment sales for an amount of 3,34,07,031/- for assessment, hence there exists certain disparity. Further, the dealer did not submit invoice wise details which are sought to be revised.
4. Reference is made to Section 21 (2) and 42 of the KVAT Act, which permits the dealer to revise the monthly return within 60 days and in the case of annual return, the W.P.(C) No. 28536 of 2016 -4- dealer can again revise where any omission or mistake in the annual return with reference to audited figures had been detected. It is stated that since the return is for the period from 2013-14, the aforesaid provision cannot be made applicable to the petitioner. Further it is stated that circular relied upon by the petitioner viz; 29/2011 is for rectifying clerical errors, which will not affect the present case and the attempt of the dealer is to escape from the penal provisions of best judgment assessment.
5. Having regard to the aforesaid fact situation involved in the matter, it is relevant to note that the time prescribed for revising the returns in terms of statutory provisions has already been over. The circular Ext.P8 relied upon by the petitioner has no application to the fact situation. Under such circumstances, prima facie I do not think that this Court will be justified in permitting the petitioner to revise the return at this point of time. According to the Department, the attempt of the petitioner is to prevent action being taken W.P.(C) No. 28536 of 2016 -5- under Section 25 (1) of the Act.
6. Be that as it may, taking into account the aforesaid factual situation, when a request is made in terms of Ext.P7, the respondent is bound to issue a reply taking note of the factual situation involved in the matter.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under:
Respondent shall consider Ext.P7 and give a reply within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Scl/05.09.2016