1995 (5) TMI 255 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Rejection of rectification application under section 21-A of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 by the Appellate Tribunal.
- Consideration of subsequent judgments by the Tribunal.
- Validity of review based on subsequent judgments.
- Application of Supreme Court judgments in similar cases.
- Unreasonableness of Tribunal's view and public policy considerations.

Analysis:
The judgment in question deals with the rejection of a rectification application under section 21-A of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 by the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal based its decision on the premise that subsequent judgments of the constitutional courts did not constitute a mistake apparent from the record necessitating a fresh order. The petitioner had cited various judgments to support their rectification request, including those from the Supreme Court and Punjab & Haryana High Court. The Supreme Court's decision in State of Kerala v. P.K. Syed Akbar Sahib was referenced, emphasizing that a review could be entertained based on a subsequent judgment, as seen in a case where the High Court declined to review its earlier judgment following a contrary Supreme Court decision.

Another significant aspect highlighted in the judgment is the application of Supreme Court judgments in similar cases. The court cited the case of Vijaya Wines v. State of Andhra Pradesh and a Division Bench decision in Hero Cycles Limited v. State of Punjab, where it was established that failure to consider a subsequent Supreme Court judgment could be deemed a mistake apparent from the record, necessitating fresh orders. The court emphasized that the Tribunal should have taken into account the latest settled law by the Supreme Court, indicating that the Tribunal had no choice but to pass fresh orders in light of the new legal position.

Moreover, the judgment underscored the unreasonableness of the Tribunal's view and its conflict with public policy considerations. The court noted that no individual should be deprived of their rights based solely on technicalities, especially when a settled law by the Supreme Court is in place. The judgment was deemed to be against the provisions of the law and was set aside, with the case remanded back to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal for fresh orders in line with the Supreme Court judgments referred to by the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed, emphasizing the importance of adhering to established legal principles and ensuring fair treatment under the law.