9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nexure P-10) passed by the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Rohtak [for short, "JETC(A)"]. Briefly, the facts as stated in the petition are that the petitioner is a public limited company. For the assessment year 2003-04, return under the VAT Act showing a turnover of Rs. 59,54,99,40,369 was filed. It included inter-State sales as well as intra-State sales. A sum of Rs. 1,34,72,10,807 calculated as tax payable on the turnover so declared was voluntarily paid by the petitioner-company. As was the practice in the earlier years, the petitioner sent certain goods on stock-transfer basis to its sale depot situated at Parwanoo in Himachal Pradesh. For this transaction, the claim was that it was a transfer of goods otherwise than ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he product is supplied to the customer as per his requirement. The transfer of material from Ambala Terminal to Parwanoo Depot was claimed to be stock transfer by the petitioner-company. During the course of assessment, the transfer of stock from Ambala Terminal to Parwanoo depot was disputed by the Assessing Authority opining the same to be despatch of goods in pursuance to pre-existing contract and thus taxed as inter-State sales from Haryana to Himachal Pradesh. In fact, even during the previous years, such dispute had been raised by the Assessing Authority which was pending consideration before the Haryana Tax Tribunal. During the year in question, the Assessing Authority, vide order dated March 16, 2007, raised a demand of Rs. 170,80, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evenue. The petitioner-company was granted time till January 31, 2008 to make the payment. Faced with the situation, the petitionercompany approached this court by filing C.W.P. No. 1050 of 2008 seeking restraint against the Assessing Authority from recovering the amount of tax. However, this court finding that application for stay was still pending before the appellate authority did not entertain the petition. However, a direction was given to the appellate authority to decide the stay application in accordance with law within a period of 15 days vide order dated January 23, 2008. The appellate authority decided the stay application filed by the petitionercompany vide order dated February 8, 2008 finding therein that in terms of section 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, (ii) irreparable loss and (iii) balance of convenience. Any assessee will go in appeal only if he is aggrieved against the action of the assessing authority in raising illegal demand. If a remedy is provided, the authority designated to exercise the power should be given full play to exercise the same and any effort by the Legislature to curtail the exercise of power in a particular manner will amount to interference in the judicial process/discretion which can straight away be held to be arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. A condition asking the assessee to pay admitted tax for entertainment of appeal is understandable or even a bar on the appellate authority to grant stay qua that amount but depriving the assessin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibed and bound down under limits in which it could be exercised. Providing a right of appeal but totally disarming the appellate authority from granting interim relief would be unjust, unfair and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. Mere application to the same authority for extension of time for payment of the amount and that too in case the person concerned is able to show that he is unable to pay the tax would mean only a remedy from Caesar to Caesar. An order passed by the Assessing Authority or the higher authority under section 22(2) and (3) of the VAT Act is treated final and not appealable under section 33 thereof. Still further, it is submitted that there is no period prescribed under the VAT Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt paid in Rs. Remarks 1996-97 2,50,58,953 2,50,58,953 Matter pending before Haryana Tax Tribunal 1997-98 13,63,21,402 Nil Matter pending before Haryana Tax Tribunal relating to issue of stay and prior payment 1998-99 26,38,15,662 Nil -do- 2000-01 43,53,12,240 16,26,25,807 Remaining amount has been stayed and matter on merits is pending before the Haryana Tax Tribunal." For the current year, initially demand of Rs. 170,80,55,315 was raised which on remand by the appellate authority in fresh assessment proceedings was reduced to Rs. 64,26,44,426. It is further submitted that the provisions are violative of article 21 of the Constitution of India. Without going into the merits of the issue of the vires of the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
