2015 (10) TMI 2482 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Seeking return of papers - Assessment order passed by 1st respondent questioned before 2nd respondent and paid an amount of ₹ 16,80,500/- and also furnished bank guarantee for ₹ 33,61,00/- by the petitioner. After having heard the appeal, the 2nd respondent rejected the contentions of the petitioner and dismissed the appeal as not entertainable holding that the dispute cannot be the subject matter of the appeal under Section 51 of the Act and instead of returning the papers to the petitioner, decided the issue relating to the provisions which is to be filed before the revisional authorities - Held that - the impugned order of the 2nd respondent dismissing the appeal as against levy of tax on TDS and the consequential levy of penalty under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT Act, for want of jurisdiction, is set aside and the 2nd respondent is directed to return all papers to the petitioner. On receipt of such papers, the same shall be presented by the petitioner before the revisional authority complying with all the formalities. On such presentation, the authority concerned shall entertain the same without any reference to the period of limitation and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Petition disposed of

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner challenges assessment order and appeal dismissal, seeks writ for quashing orders, return of amount and bank guarantee.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a company engaged in trading and manufacturing, awarded contracts to Fujita Corporation in 2013-2014. The respondent alleged invalidity of Form S due to unregistered address, demanding TDS payment. An assessment order was issued on 22.12.2014, leading to an appeal dismissal on 18.06.2015, prompting the current writ petition.

The petitioner contended before the Appellate Authority, paying Rs. 16,80,500 and furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 33,61,000. The appeal was rejected under Section 51 of the Act, stating the dispute was not appealable. The Appellate Authority delved into provisions for revisional authorities, dismissing the appeal.

Referring to a similar case, the High Court allowed a writ petition, setting aside the dismissal of appeal on tax and penalty issues. The Court directed the return of papers to the petitioner for revision within two weeks, emphasizing compliance with formalities and timely disposal of the revision.

Following the precedent, the current writ petition is allowed. The second respondent must return the papers within two weeks, enabling the petitioner to file a revision promptly. The revision should be entertained without limitation issues, with orders issued within four weeks, allowing for a stay petition considering the payment made. The expiring bank guarantee is to be returned and reconsidered during the stay petition process.

In conclusion, the writ petition is granted, allowing for the revision process without delay or limitation issues. The return of papers, timely filing of revision, and consideration of stay petition are outlined, ensuring procedural compliance and fair adjudication.