{"id":100351,"date":"2017-01-18T21:04:24","date_gmt":"2017-01-18T15:34:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=100351"},"modified":"2017-02-27T22:54:19","modified_gmt":"2017-02-27T17:24:19","slug":"legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/","title":{"rendered":"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>: \u00a0In the matter where the first proviso to Rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 was being interpreted to facilitate the determination of taxable turnover as defined in Section 2(34) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 in interface with Section 30 of the Act and Rule 31 of the Rules, the Court said that the interpretation to be extended to the proviso involved has to be essentially in accord with the legislative intention to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount as envisaged. Any exposition to probabilise exaction of the levy in excess of the due, being impermissible cannot be thus a conceivable entailment of any law on imperative impost.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court further said that to insist on the quantification of trade discount for deduction at the time of sale itself, by incorporating the same in the tax invoice\/bill of sale, would be to demand the impossible for all practical purposes and thus would be ill-logical, irrational and absurd. Trade discount though an admitted phenomenon in commerce, the computation thereof may depend on various factors singular to the parties as well as by way of uniform norms in business not necessarily enforceable or implementable at the time of the original sale. To deny the benefit of deduction only on the ground of omission to reflect the trade discount though actually granted in future, in the tax invoice\/bill of sale at the time of the original transaction would be to ignore the contemporaneous actuality and be unrealistic, unfair, unjust and deprivatory. While, devious manipulations in trade discount to avoid tax in a given fact situation is not an impossibility, such avoidance can be effectively prevented by insisting on the proof of such discount, if granted.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The bench of Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy, JJ said that the requirement of reference of the discount in the tax invoice or bill of sale to qualify it for deduction has to be construed in relation to the transaction resulting in the final sale\/purchase price and not limited to them original sale sans the trade discount. However, the transactions allowing discount have to be proved on the basis of contemporaneous records and the final sale price after deducting the trade discount must mandatorily be reflected in the accounts as stipulated under Rule 3(2)(c) of the Rules. The sale\/purchase price has to be adjudged on a combined consideration of the tax invoice or bill of sale as the case may be along with the accounts reflecting the trade discount and the actual price paid. The first proviso has thus to be so read down, as above, to be in consonance with the true intendment of the legislature and to achieve as well the avowed objective of correct determination of the taxable turnover. [Southern Motors v. State of Karnataka,<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2017_SCC_OnLine_SC_42\"> 2017 SCC OnLine SC 42<\/a>, decided on 18.01.2017]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: \u00a0In the matter where the first proviso to Rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 was being <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[2526,12231,11091,12951],"class_list":["post-100351","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-Interpretation","tag-legislative-intent","tag-taxation","tag-vat"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: \u00a0In the matter where the first proviso to Rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 was being\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-01-18T15:34:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-27T17:24:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/\",\"name\":\"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-01-18T15:34:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-27T17:24:19+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount","og_description":"Supreme Court: \u00a0In the matter where the first proviso to Rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 was being","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2017-01-18T15:34:24+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-27T17:24:19+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/","name":"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2017-01-18T15:34:24+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-27T17:24:19+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/18\/legislative-intent-behind-r-32c-first-proviso-of-the-karnataka-value-added-tax-rules-2005-is-to-sustain-realistically-the-benefit-of-trade-discount\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Legislative intent behind R. 3(2)(c) first proviso of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 is to sustain realistically the benefit of trade discount"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":212602,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/28\/sc-explains-meaning-of-total-turnover-under-the-karnataka-sales-tax-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":100351,"position":0},"title":"SC explains meaning of \u201ctotal turnover\u201d under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 28, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: While examining the\u00a0applicability\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0turnover\u00a0tax\u00a0as\u00a0defined\u00a0under Section\u00a06 B(1)\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Karnataka\u00a0Sales\u00a0Tax\u00a0Act,\u00a01957, the bench of AM Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi, JJ held: \u201cthe expression \u2018total turnover\u2019 which has been incorporated as referred to under Section 6\u00adB(1) is for the purpose of identification of the dealers and for prescribing different rates\/slabs. The first proviso to Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":216439,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/03\/section-5b-of-the-kst-act-and-rule-64mi-of-the-kst-rules-operate-in-different-spheres-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":100351,"position":1},"title":"Section 5B of the KST Act and Rule 6(4)(m)(i) of the KST Rules operate in different spheres: SC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"July 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: When the bench of AM Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi, JJ was called upon to decide whether the condition of \u2018use in the same form in which such goods are purchased\u2019 under Rule 6(4)(m)(i) of the KST Rules expands the scope of charging section i.e. Section 5B under KST\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":307430,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/18\/assessee-can-claim-full-input-tax-credit-exempted-goods-by-products-during-manufacturing-taxable-goods\/","url_meta":{"origin":100351,"position":2},"title":"UP-VAT Act entitles assessee to claim full input tax credit on exempted goods produced as by-products during manufacturing of taxable goods: Supreme Court","author":"Apoorva","date":"November 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Explanation (iii) to Section 13, forbids the Assessing Authority as well as the assessee from raising any dispute regarding the allowability of the ITC in cases where exempted goods are being produced as a by-product or waste product during the process of manufacture","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"input tax credit","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/input-tax-credit.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/input-tax-credit.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/input-tax-credit.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/input-tax-credit.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6285,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/","url_meta":{"origin":100351,"position":3},"title":"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 18, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of R.M. Lodha, CJ and J.S. Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Dr. A.K. Sikri and R.F. Nariman deciding the question of law as to whether the proviso appended to Section 113 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which was inserted in that Section by the Finance Act,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Supreme Court&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":249719,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/14\/commercial-legislations\/","url_meta":{"origin":100351,"position":4},"title":"Transitional Provisions in Commercial Legislations: An Analysis","author":"Editor","date":"June 14, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Priyal Parikh*","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":346334,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/23\/provsio-s261-land-acquisition-act-2013-method-to-compute-market-value-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":100351,"position":5},"title":"Proviso to S. 26(1) of 2013 Land Acquisition Act lays down method for computing land\u2019s market value on the date of acquisition notification: SC","author":"Sucheta","date":"April 23, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cLegislative intent behind proviso to Section 26(1) is to ensure that the landowners receive fair compensation reflective of the market value prevailing at the time of acquisition\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"market value land acquisition","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/market-value-land-acquisition.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/market-value-land-acquisition.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/market-value-land-acquisition.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/market-value-land-acquisition.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/100351","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=100351"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/100351\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=100351"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=100351"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=100351"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}