TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f customs duty evaded and subsequently unearthed by the DRI. We are at a loss and are left to guess as to which Section or provision of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 the Tribunal had in mind. Is it the definition of the term "Sale Price" as referred by Mr. Sonpal or some other which would support the prima facie view in law, has not been explained at all. Yet, crores of rupees are determined as deposit at an interim stage. This, prima facie, is no discussion, much less even an answer to the contentions raised before the Tribunal - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - Writ Petition Nos. 3354 and 3355 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 3-5-2016 - S.C. Dharmadhikari and Dr. Shalini Phansalkar Joshi, JJ. For the Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ually reproduced every single argument from the written note submitted by the petitioners' counsel. 5. However, while dealing with the said arguments, the Tribunal thought that the only aspect needs to be looked into at the interlocutory stage is that the petitioners/appellants had paid a sum of ₹ 58.04 crores as customs duty on the goods imported during the period 2004 to 2009, as per the order of the Settlement Commission under Section 7(b) of the Act. The order was passed by that Commission on 9-2-2012 pursuant to which this amount was deposited. This was never recovered from the customers as a consideration of sale price. The argument was that the tax burden was entirely of the petitioners/appellants and that is how it redu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and fixed the part-payment in one Appeal (VAT Appeal No. 941 of 2015) at ₹ 1,30,40,938/- and in another Appeal (VAT Appeal No. 942 of 2015) at ₹ 2,16,12,410/-. How these amounts are arrived at and from rejection or acceptance of which arguments and in relation to which part of the controversy, has not been clarified at all. It may be that at a prima facie stage the Tribunal would not express itself conclusively and decisively. However, from the order it must be apparent that the Tribunal applied its mind to all the issues raised and based on which the assessment has been made. If they are debatable and arguable and therefore merit consideration, then whether the rights and equities can be balanced by some arrangement or whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal. The conduct of the party is one thing and could be relevant, but how that is decisive at all times and on all occasions has not been clear to us at all. In matters after matters in which the Tribunal after referring to the contentions, setting them down seriatim must follow it by applying its mind to basic and fundamental issue at hand. In such circumstances, even this order does not meet the requirement and it is vitiated by failure to apply the mind and to consider the contentions raised at the prima facie stage. The Tribunal having noted them should have at least discussed them briefly. We do not expect it to render a final Judgment but that virtually appears to have been done and if one is required to refer to some paras, par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
