2010 (7) TMI 896 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether any illegality was committed in referring the matter to the Full Bench? Held that - The orders dated July 17, 2008 and July 31, 2008 were duly circulated amongst members and were issued by the Chairman after due consultations with all members to reduce the pendency of appeal and tone up system for the quick disposal of appeals within three months from the date of hearing of final arguments otherwise he could transfer the appeal to other Bench or Full Bench in terms of sub-rule (8) of rule 4 of the 1995 Rules. There was nothing wrong in the course of action adopted in the facts and circumstances of case as revealed by the record.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of turnover under the M.P. Commercial Tax Act - Classification of products for taxation - Referral of matter to Full Bench - Legality of the reference.

Assessment of Turnover under the M.P. Commercial Tax Act:
The petitioner, a registered dealer of fast-moving consumer goods, contested the tax assessment of certain products under the M.P. Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994. The assessing officer classified items like Boroplus antiseptic cream, Boroplus prickly heat powder, Navratan oil, Gold turmeric cream, and Nirog dant manjan under entry Nos. 41 and 49 of Part III, Schedule II, levying tax at 12 per cent instead of 8 per cent as ayurvedic drugs and medicines. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner upheld this classification for the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001.

Classification of Products for Taxation:
The petitioner appealed to the M.P. Commercial Tax Appellate Board, contesting the classification of products. The Board, after clubbing both appeals together, heard final arguments but did not communicate the order passed on August 2, 2008, leading to a reference to the Full Bench. The legality of this reference was challenged in the writ petitions.

Referral of Matter to Full Bench - Legality of Reference:
The court examined the legality of referring the matter to the Full Bench. It analyzed the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the pronouncement of judgments. Emphasizing the importance of delivering orders with notice to parties, the court concluded that an order not communicated or delivered is non est in the eyes of the law. The court reviewed the circumstances leading to the reference to the Full Bench and found no irregularity in the actions taken by the Board. The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the passing of an order alone was not sufficient unless pronounced or delivered as per legal requirements.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Madhya Pradesh High Court highlights the issues related to the assessment of turnover under the M.P. Commercial Tax Act, the classification of products for taxation, and the legality of referring the matter to the Full Bench. The court's examination of the legal provisions regarding the pronouncement of judgments and the importance of delivering orders with notice to parties provides a comprehensive understanding of the case and the court's decision to dismiss the writ petitions.