1992 (2) TMI 340 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
The petitioner challenges the order of the Commissioner of Sales Tax nullifying certain amendments to the registration certificate issued under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Amendment of Registration Certificate
The petitioner requested an amendment to its registration certificate to deal with additional goods for resale. The Sales Tax Officer allowed the amendment, but the Commissioner proposed to revise this decision, citing it as prejudicial to revenue. The petitioner argued that the notice was vague and did not specify the grounds for revision. The Commissioner concluded that the amendment was utilized for wrongful purposes, covering a fraud.

Issue 2: Legal Provisions
Section 23(4)(a) allows the Commissioner to revise orders under the Act or Rules, with reasons to be recorded in writing. Rule 80 empowers the Commissioner to revise orders within specified time frames if prejudicial to revenue, after providing an effective opportunity for the dealer to be heard. The notice for revision must clearly state the grounds for considering the order erroneous.

Judgment
The Court found that the petitioner was not given an effective opportunity to respond to the proposed revision, as the notice lacked specific grounds for the Commissioner's view. The order nullifying the amendment was vacated, and the Commissioner was directed to issue a fresh notice with detailed reasons for the proposed revision. The Court did not express an opinion on the case's merits.

Conclusion
The writ application and related case were disposed of, with the petition allowed. The Court directed the filing of requisites for communicating the order to the opposite parties by a specified date.

*Judges: PASAYAT A. and MOHANTY S.K., JJ.*