Case Law Details
State Of Gujarat Vs S A Himnani Distributors Pvt Ltd. (Gujarat High Court)
The question which is posed for consideration of this Court is, in a case where it is established and proved that due to the act of God and/or other circumstances, it is impossible to fulfill the conditions for availing input tax credit, whether the input tax credit can be denied? Identical question came to be considered by this Court in the case of Rolcon Engineering Co.Ltd. (supra). In the case before the Division Bench, the benefits given to the petitioner under the tax incentive scheme for wind power generation were sought to be withdrawn on the ground that the petitioner had committed breach of Clause 7(f) of the Gujarat Sales Incentive Scheme for Wind Power Generation, 1993 by not by not keeping the wind farm / windmills in operation for a continuous period of six years after commissioning them. In the said case, it was the case on behalf of the petitioner that due to cyclone in the coastal area windmills which were already installed, came to be destroyed. It was only on account of act of God that the petitioner industrial undertaking could not keep the wind-farm running for a continuous period of six years in commissioning them and therefore, it was not possible for the petitioner to comply with Clause 7(f) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Incentive Scheme for Wind Power Generation, 1993. Considering the various authorities, it is held by the Division Bench that a person cannot be constrained to do something which is impossible. It is further observed and held that law cannot compel a man to do what he cannot possibly do. It is further held that if it appears that the performance of the formalities prescribed by a statute had been rendered impossible by circumstances over which the person interested had no control, those circumstances would be taken as a valid excuse. It is further observed and held that when the State is inclined to give some tax benefit to tax prayers, terms or provisions of the policy should be interpreted in a liberal manner and with an intention to see that the purpose for which the policy is framed is fulfilled and the beneficiaries is helped. It is further observed that the interpretation must not be such which would frustrate the objective of the policy. I
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT
1.00. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgement and order dated 4/2/2013 passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in Second Appeal No.364 of 2010, by which, the learned appellate tribunal has allowed the said appeal and holding that the respondent – dealer is entitled to Input Tax Credit on the goods destroyed in flood, State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal with the following proposed substantial questions of law :-
“(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has rightly interpreted section 11(3), 11(5) and 11(8) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003?
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
