Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

High Court of Kerala Upholds Restriction on Input Tax Credit for Exempted Inter-State Sales of Rubber

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 

In a latest decision, the High Court of Kerala, consisting of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath, has delivered a significant judgment on the applicability of input tax credits under the Kerala Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act in conjunction with the Central Sales Tax (CST) Act. The judgment, dated November 21, 2023, addresses critical issues related to tax exemptions and input tax credits for inter-state sales of rubber.

 

 

The court examined several revision petitions (O.T. Rev. Nos. 45, 51, 52, 53, 61 of 2022), involving assessments under the KVAT and CST Acts for the years 2009-10 to 2012-13. The appellants, A.M. Rahman and Shabeer Babu T.P., challenged the denial of input tax credit and special rebate on their inter-state sales of rubber, which were exempted under notifications issued pursuant to Section 8(5) of the CST Act.

 

 

In their judgment, the justices emphasized the statutory framework governing the exemptions and rebates. The court observed, "While de hors the said provisions, Annexures-I and II notifications may probably be seen as conferring an optional exemption in respect of the tax payable under Section 8(1) of the CST Act, in view of the specific provisions of the 3rd proviso to Section 11(3) and the 3rd proviso to Section 12(1) of the KVAT Act extracted above, we cannot find it in ourselves to read the exemption notifications as optional in the particular statutory context."

 

 

The court's decision hinged on the interpretation of the exemption notifications and their implications on the input tax credit under the KVAT Act. It was concluded that the notifications effectively rendered the inter-state sales of rubber as exempted, thereby restricting the appellants' entitlement to avail input tax credit for the tax paid on purchases of rubber within the state.

 

 

 Date of Decision: 21st November 2023

 

 

A.M.RAHMAN  Versus STATE OF KERALA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Kerl-21-Nov-2023-A_M_Rahman_vs_State_Of_Kerala_Tax.pdf"]

 

Latest Legal News