VAT
Joint Commissioner's VAT Revision Cannot Be Revisited By Senior Officer: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court on 2 February held that once an order is revised by a Joint Commissioner under Section 86 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003, it cannot be subjected to a further suo motu revision under Section 85 by a Senior Joint Commissioner, as both officers act as delegates of the Commissioner and exercise the same revisional authority. A Bench of Justice Kausik Chanda, while dismissing a review petition filed by the West Bengal Tax Department, wrote: "Once an order has...
Contractors Can't Be Made To Pay Past TDS Shortfall By Contracting Authority: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently held that Rail Coach Factory (RCF) cannot recover differential tax deducted at source (TDS) from contractors for past periods once the contractors' VAT liability has already been assessed and paid. A Bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal and Justice Amarinder Singh Grewal was hearing writ petitions filed by G.S. Builders, Inderjit Bajaj and R. Tech Builders. The contractors had challenged recovery notices issued by RCF seeking to deduct additional amounts...
Tax Authorities Must Return Title Deed Given As Security Or Certify Its Loss: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has clarified that where an assessee furnishes an original title deed to the tax Department as security, the authorities are duty-bound either to trace and return the document or to formally certify that it has been irretrievably lost. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., by a judgment delivered on 16 January, was deciding a writ petition filed by M/s Bash-P-International, a partnership firm earlier registered under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act). The Court...
Department Cannot Deny Interest On Delayed VAT Refund After Blaming Assessee: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the tax department can't deny statutory interest on delayed Value Added Tax (VAT) refund by shifting the blame onto the taxpayer (assessee). A division bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Ajay Digpaul was dealing with a writ petition filed by an assessee seeking interest on VAT refund that had remained unpaid for 15 years despite the refund claim having attained finality through appeal proceedings. The Department had opposed the claim,...
Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds 200% VAT Penalty On Trader For Bogus Bill Trading
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld a penalty equal to 200% of the tax imposed on an iron and steel trader for issuing false tax invoices without actual movement of goods to facilitate wrongful availment of input tax credit. A Division Bench of Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice T.C.D. Sekhar dismissed a writ petition challenging a penalty of Rs 50.52 lakh levied under Section 55(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, for the period from June 2014 to June 2016. The...
Differential GST On Pre-GST Works Contracts To Be Reimbursed By State Agencies: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court ruled that the additional GST liability arising out of the shift from the pre-GST VAT (Value Added Tax) regime to the GST regime in ongoing works contracts cannot be imposed on contractors.The bench consists of Justice M Nagaprasanna, who directed the State Departments and government agencies to reimburse the differential GST to contractors.All the contracts were awarded prior to July 2017 under the KVAT regime, where the contract rates factored in VAT and...
AP VAT Act | Tax Dept Must Specify Negligence Before Recovering Company Dues From Directors: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati has held that tax authorities cannot recover unpaid taxes under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, from directors of the company unless they first clearly spell out the negligence or breach of duty alleged against them. A Division Bench of Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Justice T. C. D. Sekhar clarified the scope of Section 24(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The court said that while the provision does allow directors of...
APVAT | Value Added Tax Not Leviable On Offshore Sales Beyond Territorial Waters: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that Value Added Tax (VAT) under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act (AP VAT) cannot be levied on sales beyond 12 nautical miles, as such transactions fall outside the State's territorial jurisdiction. Justices R. Raghunandan Rao and T.C.D. Sekhar stated that neither the State Legislature nor the Central Legislature would have the power to levy tax on the sale of goods made beyond the territorial waters of India. In the case at hand, the...
SIM Cards, Recharge Coupons & Value-Added Services Not 'Goods' Under KVAT Act; Kerala High Court Quashes Tax Demand Against Airtel
The Kerala High Court granted relief to Bharti Airtel by holding that SIM cards, recharge coupons, fixed monthly charges and telecom value-added services cannot be treated as 'goods' under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act), on which any tax can be levied. Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Jobin Sebastian addressed a case filed by Bharti Airtel, the assessee, challenging the assessing order both on grounds of limitation and on merits, seeking to clarify that SIM...
Gujarat High Court Allows Pfizer's Additional Claims Worth ₹15 Crore Under Central Sales Tax Act, Sets Aside VAT Tribunal Order
The Gujarat High Court has allowed writ petition by Pfizer, a pharmaceutical major against the Value Added Tax (VAT) Tribunal order that expressly barred the consideration of any additional Form-F. In a judgment dated November 20, 2025, the Division Bench comprising Justice Pranav Trivedi and Justice A.S. Supehia noted the 11-year pendency in litigation in relation to production of Form-F under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. In this vein, the High Court deliberated on piecemeal...
Delhi High Court Quashes VAT Assessment Orders Passed By Audit Officer Citing Lack Of Jurisdiction
The Delhi High Court has quashed a batch of VAT assessment orders issued by VAT Audit Officer, stating that the authority did not have necessary delegation to carry out assessments.Form DVAT-50 enables the VAT Commissioner to authorize officials for carrying out audit, investigation and enforcement functions under Delhi Value Added Tax Act and Rules.However, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain noted that no such authorization was made in favour of VATO (Audit) before...
KVAT Act | Permission For Compounding Tax Cannot Be Cancelled For Suppression; Only Suppressed Turnover Can Be Taxed: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that under the KVAT Act (Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003), the assessing authority cannot cancel permission to pay tax at compounding rates for suppression in the same year it was opted, and only the suppressed turnover can be taxed at normal rates. Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim opined that cancellation proceedings are still pending, and the cancellation is not carried out, and the assessment is not concluded on a best judgment assessment basis. In such a...