In the event that the selling dealer has failed to deposit the tax collected by him from the purchasing dealer, the remedy for the Department would be to proceed against the defaulting selling dealer to recover such tax and not deny the purchasing dealer the ITC.
Section 9 (2) (g) of the Delhi Value Added Tax, 2004 – Input Tax Credit— The petitioner department’s counsel filed special leave petition. The counsel submitted that a batch of petitions were decided by the impugned order and there are some of the cases where the purchase transactions are not bonafide like the present case and those cases ought to have been remitted back to the competent authority. The court observed that they are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition.
In the event that the selling dealer has failed to deposit the tax collected by him from the purchasing dealer, the remedy for the Department would be to proceed against the defaulting selling dealer to recover such tax and not deny the purchasing dealer the ITC.
Section 9 (2) (g) of the Delhi Value Added Tax, 2004 – Input Tax Credit— The petitioner department’s counsel filed special leave petition. The counsel submitted that a batch of petitions were decided by the impugned order and there are some of the cases where the purchase transactions are not bonafide like the present case and those cases ought to have been remitted back to the competent authority. The court observed that they are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition.