VAT

Penalty u/s 64 of RVAT Act for non furnishing revised Form VAT-40E

Rajasthan Commercial Tax Department asks authorities to initiate penalty u/s 64 of RVAT Act for non furnishing revised Form VAT-40E within stipulated time

Government of Rajasthan
Commercial Taxes Department

No. F16 (375) Tax / VAT / CCT / 13 / Pt.-II/ 745

Dated: 23.01.2018

All Deputy Commissioners (Adm.)/
All Assessing Authorities
Commercial Taxes Department

CIRCULAR 01/2019

Sub: Regarding furnishing of revised Form VAT-40E

Rule 40(8A) of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Rules, 2006 envisages that every awarder holding an Awarder Identification Certificate, shall submit a statement in Form VAT-40E electronically through the official website of the department to the officer authorized under sub-rule (l),within thirty days of the end of the quarter. Where the awarder fails to furnish the statement as mentioned above, the said officer after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard, may impose penalty under section 64 of the Act.

Similarly, Rule 40(8B) provides that where an awarder discovers any omission or error in the Form VAT-40E furnished by him, he may furnish a revised Form VAT-40E within three months from the close of the relevant year.

However, it has been observed that a number of such awarders failed to revise the same in time due to ignorance of changes made in the said rule on dated 08.03.2016 w.e.f. 01.04.2016.

The provisions of sub rule 40(8B) does not prevent to proceed to revise VAT40E who failed to revise the same within the stipulated period. Therefore, it is hereby directed that the concern assessing authorities may :-

 1. Identify such awarders of their territorial jurisdiction.

2. Initiate action for levy of penalty in accordance with the provisions of Section 64 of the RVAT Act, 2003 for not revising VAT-40E in the stipulated time and pass a speaking order in this regard.

(Dr. Preetam B. Yashvant)
Comissioner,
Commercial Taxes Department
Rajasthan, Jaipur

Share

Recent Posts

  • Service Tax

Demand set aside as assessee for period covered had discharged tax liability under SVLDRS

High Court sets aside demand notices in respect of a period, for which the assessee had discharged tax liability under…

5 hours ago
  • Income Tax

No addition u/s 68 when there is no fresh receipt of unsecured loans during the year

Addition u/s 68 can not be made applicable where there is no fresh receipt of unsecured loans at all during…

8 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Taxes on sales comprising in turnover to be excluded for estimating net profit

Amount of taxes on sales comprising in turnover to be excluded while computing gross receipts for estimating net profit -…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Capital contribution deposited in assessee’s bank not partnership firm – Addition 69A upheld

Addition u/s 69A confirmed as alleged capital contribution by partners was deposited in bank account of assessee not in account…

1 day ago
  • GST

Bail granted to a CA accused in a GST evasion of more than 40 crores

Allahabad High Court grants bail to Chartered Accountant accused in a GST evasion to the tune of more than 40…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Every provision invoked casts a different onus, quoting wrong section prejudice the assessee

Every provision invoked casts a different sort of onus on the assessee – ITAT deleted addition u/s 69 towards bogus…

2 days ago