1982 (1) TMI 173 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether certain wool commodities are exempt from Central sales tax.
2. Whether the High Court should interfere in taxation matters when appeals are pending.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner contended that wool commodities like wool top, wool burrs, etc., should be considered as one commodity and exempt from Central sales tax as they are not separate from raw wool. The revenue argued that these objections should be raised before the appellate authority instead of through a writ petition. The revenue cited Supreme Court judgments emphasizing that the High Court should not interfere in tax matters when appeals are pending. The petitioner relied on Supreme Court decisions stating that the existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, the Court found that the cited cases were not applicable to the present situation. The Court noted that the assessing authority had already passed an assessment order, and an appeal was pending before the appellate authority. The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner should pursue the alternative remedy of appeal, and the appellate authority should expedite the appeal process.

2. The Court acknowledged the concerns raised by the petitioner regarding the substantial tax amount that would have to be paid before the appeal's disposal, potentially impacting the petitioner's business. The revenue's counsel assured the Court that a stay application for the tax amount could be reasonably considered by the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Court emphasized the need for the appellate authority to promptly dispose of the appeals, ideally within three months. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioner should continue with the appeal process and refrained from expressing any opinion on the case's merits.

In conclusion, the High Court held that the petitioner should pursue the appeal process rather than seeking intervention through a writ petition, emphasizing the importance of allowing the appellate authority to address the raised issues promptly. The Court highlighted the need for the appellate authority to consider relevant circumstances, such as the potential impact on the petitioner's business, when dealing with the appeal.