Dated:- 25-9-2017 – The State of Karnataka Versus M/s. M.K. Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd. – 2017 (9) TMI 1308 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA In an important decision though related to Karnataka Value Added Tax (VAT) but equally important in the GST era for reversal of Input Tax Credit on exempted by-products. While interpreting the provisions of Section 17 of KVAT, hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 2017 (9) TMI 1308 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, held that: – Fourthly, the entire scheme of the KVAT Act is to be kept in mind and Section 17 is to be applied in that context. Sunflower oil cake is subject to input tax. The Legislature, however, has incorporated the provision, in the form of Section 10, to give tax credit in respect of such goods which are u
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
given and under what circumstances, is the domain of the Legislature and the courts are not to tinker with the same. – Judgment in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and Others [ 1992 (7) TMI 292 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] relied upon. – To the same effect are the judgments in the case of Hotel Balaji & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. [ 1992 (10) TMI 240 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] – In this context, if the Legislature has decided to give partial rebate of input tax under the circumstances mentioned in that provision, that has to be strictly applied. – On literal interpretation of Section 17 it can be gathered that it does not distinguish between by-product, ancillary product, intermed
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =