2025-VIL-674-GAU
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-674-GAU

VAT High Court Cases

Central Sales Tax Act 1956 - Section 15(b) - Section 50, Section 83 of Assam Value Added Tax Act 2003 - Declared goods, Raw Petroleum Coke (RPC), Calcined Petroleum Coke (CPC), Reimbursement of VAT, Industrial tax exemption scheme - The petitioner claimed reimbursement of VAT paid on RPC purchase under Section 15(b) of the CST Act, as both RPC and CPC are declared goods under Section 14 of the CST Act - The petitioner was eligible for 99% tax exemption under the Assam Industries (Tax Exemption) Scheme, 2009, requiring payment of only 1% of the applicable tax. The Assistant Commissioner of Taxes initially completed audit assessments without addressing the reimbursement claim. Subsequently, rectification orders were passed acknowledging the petitioner's entitlement to reimbursement. However, the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam, vide impugned orders, rejected the refund proposals - Whether the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of Value Added Tax paid on purchase of Raw Petroleum Coke under Section 15(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, when the manufactured Calcined Petroleum Coke is sold in inter-state trade after paying Central Sales Tax at the reduced rate of 1% under an Industrial Tax Exemption Scheme, and whether the Commissioner's rejection of such claims on grounds of non-payment of full Central Sales Tax, acquiescence, delay and laches, and improper rectification under Section 83 of the AVAT Act is legally sustainable – HELD - the Supreme Court in India Carbon Ltd. vs. Superintendent of Taxes definitively established that Petroleum Coke, including both Raw Petroleum Coke and Calcined Petroleum Coke, falls within the phrase "Coal, including Coke in all its forms" under Section 14 of the CST Act, making them declared goods of special importance in inter-state trade - The general principles of law laid down by superior courts are applicable to all persons regardless of whether they were parties to the original proceedings - the non-consideration of binding Supreme Court precedents constitutes an "error apparent on the face of record" that can be rectified within the three-year limitation period - Section 15(b) of the CST Act requires payment of tax under the CST Act, not necessarily the full amount, especially when statutory exemptions are available. Since the petitioner was eligible for 99% tax exemption under the Assam Industries (Tax Exemption) Scheme, 2009, and had paid the required 1% of CST, the condition of tax payment under the CST Act was satisfied – The mere inaction or delay in processing applications does not constitute acquiescence, particularly when no prejudicial decision had been made against the petitioner's rights - the respondent authorities are directed to process the petitioner's claim for reimbursement of VAT paid on Raw Petroleum Coke purchases in accordance with Section 15(b) of the CST Act read with Sections 50 and 52 of the AVAT Act – The petitions are allowed
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST changes in July '25
By Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?