TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat by itself does not permit, in the absence of any express provision under the CST Act or corresponding provisions under the OET Act to permit the refund payable under the one Act to be adjusted against the liability under the other Act. Secondly, as rightly pointed out this cannot be treated as garnishee proceedings unless there is an express provision under the statute that permits this kind of an adjustment. The Court would like to clarify that it should not be understood as holding that the Petitioner does not owe the Department ₹ 79,44,056/- as admitted by it towards interest under the OET Act for the period from 1st April, 2009 to 31st May, 2017. At the same time, as clarified by Mr. Mishra, the Department also does not q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le by the Petitioner towards interest levied under the Orissa Entry Tax Act (OET Act). 2. The background facts are that the Petitioner is a unit of Kesoram Industries and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of tyres, tubes and flaps. It has its factory at Chhanpur in Balasore district. 3. For the period 1st April, 2006 to 31st March, 2007 the Petitioner was assessed under the CST Act. By an order dated 5th September, 2008 a demand of ₹ 1,12,91,853/- was raised against the Petitioner of which the tax component was ₹ 37,63,951/- and the remaining was towards penalty. Aggrieved by the above assessment order the Petitioner, pursuant to an order of this court on 14th August, 2019 in W.P.(C) No.4709 of 2008 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been done unilaterally without any notice to the Petitioner. Mr. Ray, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioner further contends that there is no provision akin to Section 226 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which envisages garnishee proceedings whereby the dues of an Assessee could be sought to be recovered from some other amount owed to it in separate proceedings. He points out that here the refund was due to the Petitioner under the CST Act and there is no provision under the OET Act which permits adjustment of the CST tax refund against the liability of interest under the OET Act. 7. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the department refers to para 22 of the counter affidavit in which it is stated that such an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pposite Party No.2 against the interest payable under the OET Act. There being a charge is very different from straightaway recoevrring the sum even without a notice. 9. Mr. Mishra sought to justify such adjustment by contending that the Opposite Party No.2 was the same authority exercising powers both under the CST Act as well as the OET Act. While it may be correct that it is the same person who exercises powers under both the Acts, but the functions performed as an Assessing Officer under the CST Act is distinguishable from the functions performed under the OET Act. Theoretically, it is possible that two different persons could be exercising these functions under the respective enactments. That by itself does not permit, in the abse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
