1999 (3) TMI 618 - AT - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to the constitutionality of the expression "any person objecting to an order passed" in section 31(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.

Analysis:
The original petitions were filed under article 226 of the Constitution challenging the provision of section 31(1) of the Act as discriminatory and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners contended that the provision restricts the remedy by way of appeal only to the person directly imposed with liability, excluding other parties equally affected by the order. The background revealed adverse remarks in an assessment order against the petitioners, leading to their claim of being aggrieved parties entitled to appeal despite not being directly liable under the Act.

The Tribunal examined section 31 of the Act, which specifies the right of appeal against orders passed under various sections related to tax assessments and penalties. It emphasized that the privilege of appeal is reserved for parties directly affected by tax liabilities or penalties imposed under the Act. The purpose of the Act is to collect taxes on goods sales or purchases and penalize violations, thus restricting appeals to aggrieved parties facing tax liabilities or penalties. The provision aims to prevent appeals from individuals not directly impacted by tax or penalty orders, ensuring the legitimacy of appeals under the Act.

Regarding the constitutional aspects raised by the petitioners, the Tribunal analyzed articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution. It concluded that section 31 of the Act does not violate these constitutional provisions. Article 14, guaranteeing equality before the law, is preserved as all affected persons have an equal opportunity to appeal under the Act. The Tribunal found no violation of article 19(1)(g) as there was no evidence of hindrance to the petitioners' professions or businesses. Additionally, article 265, pertaining to the lawful levy and collection of taxes, was not infringed as no unauthorized tax demands were made against the petitioners. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the original petitions, ruling that the impugned expression in section 31 does not contravene the Constitution.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that the provision in section 31(1) of the Act, limiting appeals to parties directly affected by tax liabilities or penalties, is constitutional and does not violate the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India. The original petitions were dismissed, and the Tribunal ordered compliance with its decision.