9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 769 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxLocus of revisionist as a dealer - Held that - In the instant case, an application for seeking the clarification was moved as per the direction of the honourable High Court, which was not challenged by the Department. So, the direction dated March 8, 2000 of the honourable court attains the finality and is binding on the Department. Moving of the application under section 35 of the Act, is an off-suit of the said direction and that is binding upon the lower authorities, even it was wrong. It was the pious duty of the authority concerned to obey the same or assail the same before the honourable apex court, but neither the order was challenged nor it was complied with. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal dated June 13, 2001 is hereby set aside. The Tribunal is directed to decide the issue de novo on merit, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the revisionist, as per the spirit of the direction dated March 8, 2000, issued by the honourable High Court.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of section 35 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act regarding determination of disputed questions. 2. Whether the tent services provided by an association of tent house owners are subject to trade tax. 3. Locus standi of the revisionist association in seeking clarification under section 35 of the Act. Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 35 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act: The judgment revolves around the interpretation of section 35 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act, which deals with the determination of disputed questions related to trade tax. The court emphasizes that the Commissioner can only adjudicate upon questions arising from applications filed by dealers or individuals regarding specific matters outlined in the Act. It is clarified that the Commissioner's jurisdiction under this section is limited to existing facts and cannot be based on assumed future scenarios. The judgment cites a previous case to support this interpretation, highlighting that declarations from the Commissioner must be based on current facts, not speculative future events. Issue 2: Taxability of Tent Services: The case concerns an association of tent house owners seeking clarification on whether their tent services fall under the purview of the U. P. Trade Tax Act. Initially, the Commissioner rejected the association's application, stating they were not dealers. However, the High Court directed the Commissioner to reconsider the matter promptly. Despite the direction attaining finality and being binding on the Department, the Commissioner decided against the association. The court notes that the association's application under section 35 of the Act was a result of the High Court's directive, which the lower authorities should have followed. The judgment ultimately sets aside the Tribunal's order and directs a fresh consideration of the issue in light of the High Court's directive. Issue 3: Locus Standi of the Revisionist Association: The judgment addresses the locus standi of the revisionist association, emphasizing that they have the requisite standing to seek clarification under section 35 of the Act. The association, formed for the protection and common business interests of its members, was wrongly denied locus by the Tribunal. The court acknowledges the association's legitimate interest in determining the taxability of their services and overturns the Tribunal's decision, directing a reevaluation of the matter with the association's full participation and in accordance with the High Court's directive. In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the interpretation of section 35 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act, highlights the taxability issue concerning tent services provided by an association of tent house owners, and upholds the locus standi of the revisionist association in seeking clarification under the Act. The court's decision sets aside the Tribunal's order and instructs a fresh consideration of the matter, ensuring the association's participation and adherence to the High Court's directive.
|
