9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 1439 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxComputation of surcharge payable by the petitioner for the periods 1999-2000 up-to 2001-2002 after a gap of over fifteen years - HELD THAT - In the decision of the Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES OTHERS VERSUS M/S BAJAJ AUTO LTD. ANOTHER 2016 (11) TMI 31 - SUPREME COURT the Department did not seek the leave of the Supreme Court to reopen the assessment of all other assessees and raise a fresh demand on re-computation irrespective of the time gap. In the present case the re-computation is after a gap of over fifteen years. The court quashes the impugned order of the re-computation and the consequential demand raised against the petitioner - writ petition is disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to re-computation of surcharge for periods 1999-2000 to 2001-2002 based on a Supreme Court decision. Interpretation of applicability of previous court decisions. Validity of re-computation after a significant time gap. Analysis: The petition challenged an order re-computing the surcharge payable by the petitioner for the periods 1999-2000 up to 2001-2002, following a Supreme Court decision. The court noted that a previous decision by the same court had addressed a similar issue, but the Department sought to rely on a different Supreme Court decision. However, the court found the Supreme Court decision cited by the Department distinguishable in its applicability to the present case. Notably, orders passed by subordinate authorities had not been challenged before the Supreme Court, and refunds had been paid to the petitioners based on those orders. The court highlighted that even in the Supreme Court's decision in a related case, the Department had not sought to reopen assessments for other assessees after a significant time gap, as was done in the present case after over fifteen years. The court ultimately quashed the impugned order of re-computation and the consequential demand raised against the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with an urgent certified copy of the order to be issued as per rules.
|
