High Court of Madras
State of Tamil Nadu v. I. Vetrivel
For revenue
TCR(MD) NOS. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 AND 30 OF 2024
High Court of Madras
TCR(MD) NOS. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 AND 30 OF 2024
Purchase tax under TNGST and TNVAT was leviable on sand, gravel and jelly purchased from unregistered dealers and used in works contracts; Constitution Bench precedent affirmed such levy, and orders of first appellate authority and Tribunal annulling purchase tax were perverse and set aside, restoring assessments. TNGST: Purchase tax under Section 7-A under TN General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was validly leviable on materials purchased from unregistered dealers for works contracts; Section 7-A operated independently of Section 3-B, which governed taxable turnover of transfer of property, and non obstante clause did not exclude purchase tax on goods not previously tax-suffered.
Purchase tax and penalty were validly leviable on materials purchased from unregistered dealers and used in works contracts; upon upholding purchase-tax liability, returns would become incorrect and incomplete, attracting statutory penalties under both TNGST and TNVAT enactments, and assessee’s challenge was to be dismissed
Section 7A of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Section 12 of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006; Section 7-A, read with section 3B, of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959; Section 12 of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Section 27 of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.
Members
The background, the issue before the court and the reasoning behind the decision are free for members — along with the professional discussion on this ruling.
Free to join. No card required.
Already a member? Sign in
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Where petitioner-taxi union was permitted to operate on public land under temporary allotment and rental terms, respondents could not demand GST on rentals for period prior to 08.07.2017 since GST came into force only thereafter, and petitioner was liable for dues with GST only for period commencing from 08.07.2017
GSTAT Hyderabad
Where outsourced caterer supplied food to in-patients within a hospital under contract, and only one supply, namely food, was made to hospital and not as part of composite healthcare supply, GST was leviable on such supply, as composite supply test failed and CBIC Circular supporting exemption applied only to supplies directly by healthcare provider and not outsourced caterer GST: Where caterer did not pay tax on in-patient food supplies based on an incorrect understanding of a Board Circular and no deliberate non-payment was established, invocation of section 74 was unsustainable, and dropping of penalty further negated mala fide intent, thus proceedings were to be treated under section 73 with proper re-determination of tax, interest and penalties GST: Where caterer supplied food to in-patients as per agreement with invoices showing no separate GST tax and department did not allege collection of tax above invoice value, invoice value was to be treated inclusive of tax, requiring application of cum-tax valuation under Rule 35, and tax liability was to be recomputed accordingly, ensuring no excess collection beyond statutory due
Calcutta High Court
Where electrical line repair and maintenance services had been completed in 2015 before introduction of GST, subsequent approval and billing in 2019 could not alter date of supply or bring completed services within GST regime, consequently payment withheld for want of GST registration was directed to be released with interest after deducting tax, if any, applicable under pre-GST regime