2010 (9) TMI 962 - AT - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of the assessment order dated June 28, 2006.
2. Validity of the rejection of the appeal petition on November 12, 2008.
3. Legitimacy of the order dated June 16, 2010 by the designated authority.
4. Compliance with the provisions of the West Bengal Sales Tax (Settlement of Dispute) Act, 1999 (SOD Act).

Summary:

1. Legality of the assessment order dated June 28, 2006:
The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Siliguri Charge (ACCT/SG) assessed the petitioner-company for the period ending March 31, 2004, determining an excess payment of Rs. 3,44,706, which was adjusted against the interest levied, resulting in a net demand of Rs. 9,21,131. The petitioner disputed the levy of interest, purchase tax, penalty, and tax amount.

2. Validity of the rejection of the appeal petition on November 12, 2008:
The petitioner-company filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Siliguri Circle (DCCT/SG) and simultaneously applied for settlement u/s 5 of the SOD Act. Despite the pending application, the DCCT/SG rejected the appeal on November 12, 2008, citing non-payment of interest u/s 31(1) of the 1994 Act. The Tribunal set aside this rejection, noting procedural lapses and lack of notice to the petitioner.

3. Legitimacy of the order dated June 16, 2010 by the designated authority:
Following the Tribunal's directive, the designated authority ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 12,65,837 within fifteen days, failing which the application under the SOD Act would be rejected. The petitioner challenged this order, arguing that the designated authority improperly considered the merits of the appeal petition and did not provide an opportunity for a hearing.

4. Compliance with the provisions of the SOD Act:
The Tribunal examined whether the designated authority could scrutinize the correctness of the admitted/disputed tax during the settlement application process. It was determined that the authority could ensure the payment of admitted tax but not delve into the merits of the appeal. The Tribunal upheld the order dated June 16, 2010, finding no violation of section 11 of the SOD Act and concluded that the petitioner had been given sufficient opportunity to present their case.

Final Order:
The Tribunal directed the respondents to pass a fresh order regarding the appeal petition for the relevant period, in compliance with the Tribunal's earlier order dated December 23, 2008.